On anti-HP-hype

[conuly]

A lot of people on my friends list today have posted about how they don't want the new HP book when it comes out. Harry Potter is derivative, a rip-off. It's badly written. It's in serious need of a good editing job. It's overhyped!

Well, yeah. I know!

I have always liked literary fluff. I still have very fond memories of the Baby-Sitters Club books, and of the Sweet Valley Twins series. I will happily read cheesy sci-fi novels with plot holes big enough to drive trucks though. (I also watch Lifetime and Disney made-for-tv movies, which really should give an indication of my taste). Yes, I read and enjoy serious works as well, but I've always felt there was a little bit of fun in reading candy. Or mocking it, whatever.

Am I the only one who sees it that way? Don't take Harry Potter so seriously. Read it, laugh, and move on with your life. Or don't read it. But don't diss those of us who happen to like badly-written books and movies.

Comments

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

FLUFF RULEZ!!!!

I loved all those books as a kid. I really regret letting my mother get rid of all my Babysitters Club books. I had ALL of them. *sigh*

[conuly]

ALL of them? *is awed*

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

I'm not even a Harry Potter fan, but even I can see that the Harry Potter books are very well written, and I feel this should be apparent to anyone upon opening any of the books to any page. Also, "derivative" of what? I don't remember seeing a Harry Potter boy-wizard character previous. I also don't think the books are in need of any editing beyond what they already receive. Sigh. From whence these comments?

[conuly]

I disagree. I don't think they're well-written at all.

Many of the characters are two-dimensional. There's glimpses that they could be more, but she never follows through with this.

The same adjectives are used over and over again. Try counting how often Hermione says something "waspishly". She never says something causticly, or cruelly, or snidely, or sardonically, it's always "waspishly". She doesn't even just *say* something. Why do we need to be told that an insult was said in an insulting fashion?

As for editing, I disagree again with you. There is no need for the books to be as long as they are. There's no need for JKR to put in loads of backstory in every book, the people reading the fifth book have read the first five. 100 pages could've been cut off of the last book if she'd just cut out the details that add nothing to the story.

And editing doesn't just mean "cutting out parts". It also means "making sure there aren't serious errors". She's had full moons when full moons are impossible, she's had characters repeat a year (something I'm assured is nearly impossible in the British system, especially if the year they repeat is their last year in school), she's made mistakes through the books. And that's fine, it happens - but a good editor should catch the more obvious ones.

Derivative? Well, aside from the infamous "Larry Potter" incident when they first became famous, there's the Worst Witch series to contend with. She's not on the grounds of copyright infringement, not by far, and I certainly agree that there's only so many ideas going around the world at any one time, but she's not the unique ideas person she's made out to be.

[furiosity.livejournal.com]

I think a lot of the anti-HP hype stems from the whole "That J.K. Rowling is a lucky bitch, I wish I was her" syndrome rather than real faults with the books themselves. Not to say the series is flawless or all faults are imagined, but I can tell "you're just jealous" when I see it. A lot of wannabe writers have made noise about JKR as a talentless hack, but they remain wannabes, and she's the one with the 7-book deal. That kind of thing stings, if someone is immature like that.

Derivative? What isn't, these days?
A rip-off? Please. Just because JKR re-uses archetypes that everyone and their dog does, just because she's writing about childhood and school life does not make her works a rip-off. See "derivative".
Badly written? If you consider "good writing" on the merits of usage of the English language alone, perhaps. If someone considers "good writing" also good storytelling and can with a clear conscience say that JKR's writing is bad on the merits of storytelling, then I point and laugh in their direction while singing "You're just jealous."
In a serious need of an editing job -- why? Because some people didn't get the Ministry of Magic scene in OotP? No one ever said you didn't have to use your brain while reading Book 5, dammit. Granted, with some extra editing, the series can be improved, but what can't?
Over-hyped? I think that's the "You're just jealous" crowd's substitute for "popular," at least in this case. The series is popular because people are reading the books, writing stories set in the world, and trying to figure out what's going to happen next while anxiously anticipating film and book releases. That's because people love these books, not because the media tells them they're cool.

Any "you"s in the above refer to the hypothetical "you, gentle reader" rather than you personally, Conuly. :o) People take it so damn seriously because deep inside, many can't stand the thought that a single mother on welfare could pull off something like this, it leads to "Why her, why not me?" And I think that's pretty damn rotten of them. That said, I don't think every single person who doesn't like the series dislikes it for that reason. I think there are a heck of a lot more people who feel that way than there are people who'll admit they do.

[conuly]

JKR isn't a *bad* storyteller, exactly - she's just not a *great* one. And she really doesn't know how to cut out the dreck from her books. I'll say it again, and shout it from the rooftops, there's no need for them to be that long. (She's not the only one with that problem, that's the main reason I've never gotten into LotR as well. I can't deal with the description).

[ladyshrew.livejournal.com]

I personally can't stand the HP hype, but I don't look down on those who enjoy the books. And I completely understand where you're coming from, because I totally admit to buying music for those reasons. :-P

[xmorningxrosex.livejournal.com]

Yup, another Baby-Sitters Club books reader here! Although, I always skipped the second chapter where they reintroduced all of the gang. Boxcar Children, that's another impossible series, yet was still a lot of fun for 6- and 7-year old me. :)

I like the Harry Potter series as well. I think the first couple were the last books my sisters (at age 20!) actually read, and hey, if it gets them to read, it's gotta be a good thing. :P

[conuly]

Oh, the Boxcar children. That was good while the creator was alive, but then... their ages would change, and their ages relative to one another. It was horrible.

[semirose.livejournal.com]

Personaly, I love the Harry Potter world, and I think JK did a good job with that, but I know I have read fics that have better plots and better characterizations than the books ever will have. But of course these are fics, and so not much other that a lot of online fame will come from them. I can't wait to read the next book to see what will be added to the world of canon, but I'm secure in the knowledge that if I don't like it I can just sink back into the fandom and read fics that will use the characters that I love in a way that I like.

I read a post last month on idlerat's journal that was rather amusing. It's basically comparing different well known fanfiction writers writing styles to chacters from the books, and here is the last comment.

Crude, obvious, over-the-top, childish; not-very-cunning plots. Can be relied on to periodically mess up everyone else's story.
Voldemort = Joanne K. Rowling

[conuly]

Don't delete! You got it this time!

[innerbrat]

Y'know what? I can't stand the hype surrounding the Harry Potter series, and I'm a fan.

I'm not going to enter into a literary debate: I'm a scientist, not a literary critic, and when I like a series, I can't say for certain what I do and don't like about it.

But I'm prepared to agree with you on Fluff: Hells, I love Buffy, and that's much fluffier. A lot on the characters are two dimensional, but a good many (mostly the adults) are interesting and are revealing themselves to be much better developed than I gave them credit for.
Snape, for instance: the cliche would have him reveal himself to be good and noble after all, but he's still a petty, spiteful little man who's spent much too long in a teaching institution. There's reasons behind his behaviour.

Incidentally, I hate the LotR books. I've read them recently and I never intend to read them again. Them, I consider to be badly written, although I like the stories and I appreciate the pioneering aspect of them.
Originality does not a good story make.

[feathered.livejournal.com]

I agree on all counts. I like the HP books, I'm terribly fond of them because I met three of my favourite people through the old amazon harry potter forum, and I buy and read each new book the day it comes out. And I hate the hype. I'd complain about it in my own journal if I weren't so lazy.

I guess, like Uly said, the problem is everyone takes them so seriously. They are either GREAT books or BLOODY HORRIBLE books, but never just books.

(I don't like the LoTR books either, innerbrat. It's a closely-held secret of mine.. It's dangerous to say in public! I respect them, but I sure as hell wouldn't read them for fun.)

[deceptica]

Bah, anti-hype.

I'm not a fan of hype either, but I can't really get mad at people for being all excited, happy and bouncy about something. They are not hurting anyone.

Anti-hype on the other hand... I have no problem with people not liking things I like or the other way round, but what's with all the hatred? Nobody forces you to buy or read the next book. Spouting hate tirades about it just to be different from the people on your friends list is not cool.

[farraige.livejournal.com]

I have too much respect for my brain to plough through the formulaic, cleverly marketed commercial crap that is J.K. Rowling's or Terry Pratchett's literature. While it may do for 10-year-olds (I seem to have been completely indiscriminate to what printed material I absorbed then), a 30-year-old is likely to die of embarrassment before a book is finished.

[conuly]

I don't think dying of embarassment is a realistic goal. I certainly never have, and I know people older than I am who never have.

People read friggin' romances in public, they're going to get embarassed over reading Pterry and JKR?

[mhari.livejournal.com]

Rarrr. I despise the kind of literary snobbery that dismisses something as shit just because it's popular. It's a bare step up from the kiddies who shop at Hot Topic because they want to be OMGrebellious!!!1

"Lookit me, I have SUPERIOR TASTES!" Fuck 'em.

I don't deny that JKR needs a few blue pencils, but they're not the tripe these snots make them out to be.

[sgt-pooh.livejournal.com]

I am a Children's Literature major. I was and still am a reader. I've studied what makes good literature, but in the end, it's what's being read that makes the difference. Literature comes alive when it's shared. JMHO
I grew up when reading wasn't the "thing". You'd never catch kids reading, ever. Except for me, of course, but I was always the weird, smart kid. LOL JKR may not be the best author in the world(that would be Tolkien, in my book), but she did make it ok for kids to read, so for that I salute her.
I would have never picked the series up, if it hadn't been for the hype surrounding the first book. I read all banned books I know about, it's just a thing I have to do. I loved it. I gave a HB copy to my 8 year-old for her birthday that year. She never got HB, so that was a statement in favor of the book right there.
I teach Jr. High and all of my kids read! It excites me to no end. :) They are reading HP and "Unfortunate Events" and lots of other things. I love HP myself, but the "Unfortunate" series? Ug. Would I tell them it's drivel? Never. It's not my cup of tea, but if they like it...
I cringed through my child reading Babysitter's Club and Goosebumps. I never stopped her from reading it, I just knew there was better stories out there. She's found them now. We read together. I read books first, she reads them, then we discuss. Everything from "Catcher in the Rye", "Lord of the Flies", LOTR, to HP. It's lovely. We love the HP series most of all at the moment. It's fun for us and and THAT is all that matters.



btw, I love Terry Pratchett, too. It's great escapist literature. I have yet to die of embarrassment and I'm 38. No offense.

[missfahrenheit.livejournal.com]

I love HP and Pratchett because they're so wonderfully escapist. Mind you, I also think they are well-written, if only because they're so wonderfully, amazingly absorbing. I've just re-read Feet of Clay and am absolutely amazed at how every single piece fits together. You can probably say the same for HP as a whole, because even though there are plot holes there's more clues and foreshadowing than you can shake a stick at.

I do love ASOUE, and for me I think it's Snicket's/Hander's writing style. The actual plots are paper-thin (barring the mystery of VFD!), but the way they're written is so quirky and wonderfully unusual that I keep going back to them :)

[the-lady-aurora.livejournal.com]

I love all of the Terry Pratchett Discworld books. I'm 40 and read and re-read them constantly.

As for HP: I read the first 4 one after the other and enjoyed them. Waited for the paperback of the last one and can't get into it at all. I've tried on a number of occasions and I'm still only about 30 pages in. It doesn't seem to be as well written as the others but I think my main problem is the character names - some of them just seem incredibly childish and for some reason it really grates on my nerves.

Must really persevere - I've been told it's worth it.

[conuly]

You know what? The first part of that book goes on forever. Try skipping ahead to the train ride, see if you like the book better then.

[missfahrenheit.livejournal.com]

As for HP Fandom? Hating JKR is totally the new slash.

[the-turtle-girl.livejournal.com]

FLUFF RULEZ!!!!

I loved all those books as a kid. I really regret letting my mother get rid of all my Babysitters Club books. I had ALL of them. *sigh*

[conuly]

ALL of them? *is awed*

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

I'm not even a Harry Potter fan, but even I can see that the Harry Potter books are very well written, and I feel this should be apparent to anyone upon opening any of the books to any page. Also, "derivative" of what? I don't remember seeing a Harry Potter boy-wizard character previous. I also don't think the books are in need of any editing beyond what they already receive. Sigh. From whence these comments?

[conuly]

I disagree. I don't think they're well-written at all.

Many of the characters are two-dimensional. There's glimpses that they could be more, but she never follows through with this.

The same adjectives are used over and over again. Try counting how often Hermione says something "waspishly". She never says something causticly, or cruelly, or snidely, or sardonically, it's always "waspishly". She doesn't even just *say* something. Why do we need to be told that an insult was said in an insulting fashion?

As for editing, I disagree again with you. There is no need for the books to be as long as they are. There's no need for JKR to put in loads of backstory in every book, the people reading the fifth book have read the first five. 100 pages could've been cut off of the last book if she'd just cut out the details that add nothing to the story.

And editing doesn't just mean "cutting out parts". It also means "making sure there aren't serious errors". She's had full moons when full moons are impossible, she's had characters repeat a year (something I'm assured is nearly impossible in the British system, especially if the year they repeat is their last year in school), she's made mistakes through the books. And that's fine, it happens - but a good editor should catch the more obvious ones.

Derivative? Well, aside from the infamous "Larry Potter" incident when they first became famous, there's the Worst Witch series to contend with. She's not on the grounds of copyright infringement, not by far, and I certainly agree that there's only so many ideas going around the world at any one time, but she's not the unique ideas person she's made out to be.

[furiosity.livejournal.com]

I think a lot of the anti-HP hype stems from the whole "That J.K. Rowling is a lucky bitch, I wish I was her" syndrome rather than real faults with the books themselves. Not to say the series is flawless or all faults are imagined, but I can tell "you're just jealous" when I see it. A lot of wannabe writers have made noise about JKR as a talentless hack, but they remain wannabes, and she's the one with the 7-book deal. That kind of thing stings, if someone is immature like that.

Derivative? What isn't, these days?
A rip-off? Please. Just because JKR re-uses archetypes that everyone and their dog does, just because she's writing about childhood and school life does not make her works a rip-off. See "derivative".
Badly written? If you consider "good writing" on the merits of usage of the English language alone, perhaps. If someone considers "good writing" also good storytelling and can with a clear conscience say that JKR's writing is bad on the merits of storytelling, then I point and laugh in their direction while singing "You're just jealous."
In a serious need of an editing job -- why? Because some people didn't get the Ministry of Magic scene in OotP? No one ever said you didn't have to use your brain while reading Book 5, dammit. Granted, with some extra editing, the series can be improved, but what can't?
Over-hyped? I think that's the "You're just jealous" crowd's substitute for "popular," at least in this case. The series is popular because people are reading the books, writing stories set in the world, and trying to figure out what's going to happen next while anxiously anticipating film and book releases. That's because people love these books, not because the media tells them they're cool.

Any "you"s in the above refer to the hypothetical "you, gentle reader" rather than you personally, Conuly. :o) People take it so damn seriously because deep inside, many can't stand the thought that a single mother on welfare could pull off something like this, it leads to "Why her, why not me?" And I think that's pretty damn rotten of them. That said, I don't think every single person who doesn't like the series dislikes it for that reason. I think there are a heck of a lot more people who feel that way than there are people who'll admit they do.

[conuly]

JKR isn't a *bad* storyteller, exactly - she's just not a *great* one. And she really doesn't know how to cut out the dreck from her books. I'll say it again, and shout it from the rooftops, there's no need for them to be that long. (She's not the only one with that problem, that's the main reason I've never gotten into LotR as well. I can't deal with the description).

[ladyshrew.livejournal.com]

I personally can't stand the HP hype, but I don't look down on those who enjoy the books. And I completely understand where you're coming from, because I totally admit to buying music for those reasons. :-P

[xmorningxrosex.livejournal.com]

Yup, another Baby-Sitters Club books reader here! Although, I always skipped the second chapter where they reintroduced all of the gang. Boxcar Children, that's another impossible series, yet was still a lot of fun for 6- and 7-year old me. :)

I like the Harry Potter series as well. I think the first couple were the last books my sisters (at age 20!) actually read, and hey, if it gets them to read, it's gotta be a good thing. :P

[conuly]

Oh, the Boxcar children. That was good while the creator was alive, but then... their ages would change, and their ages relative to one another. It was horrible.

[semirose.livejournal.com]

Personaly, I love the Harry Potter world, and I think JK did a good job with that, but I know I have read fics that have better plots and better characterizations than the books ever will have. But of course these are fics, and so not much other that a lot of online fame will come from them. I can't wait to read the next book to see what will be added to the world of canon, but I'm secure in the knowledge that if I don't like it I can just sink back into the fandom and read fics that will use the characters that I love in a way that I like.

I read a post last month on idlerat's journal that was rather amusing. It's basically comparing different well known fanfiction writers writing styles to chacters from the books, and here is the last comment.

Crude, obvious, over-the-top, childish; not-very-cunning plots. Can be relied on to periodically mess up everyone else's story.
Voldemort = Joanne K. Rowling

[conuly]

Don't delete! You got it this time!

[innerbrat]

Y'know what? I can't stand the hype surrounding the Harry Potter series, and I'm a fan.

I'm not going to enter into a literary debate: I'm a scientist, not a literary critic, and when I like a series, I can't say for certain what I do and don't like about it.

But I'm prepared to agree with you on Fluff: Hells, I love Buffy, and that's much fluffier. A lot on the characters are two dimensional, but a good many (mostly the adults) are interesting and are revealing themselves to be much better developed than I gave them credit for.
Snape, for instance: the cliche would have him reveal himself to be good and noble after all, but he's still a petty, spiteful little man who's spent much too long in a teaching institution. There's reasons behind his behaviour.

Incidentally, I hate the LotR books. I've read them recently and I never intend to read them again. Them, I consider to be badly written, although I like the stories and I appreciate the pioneering aspect of them.
Originality does not a good story make.

[feathered.livejournal.com]

I agree on all counts. I like the HP books, I'm terribly fond of them because I met three of my favourite people through the old amazon harry potter forum, and I buy and read each new book the day it comes out. And I hate the hype. I'd complain about it in my own journal if I weren't so lazy.

I guess, like Uly said, the problem is everyone takes them so seriously. They are either GREAT books or BLOODY HORRIBLE books, but never just books.

(I don't like the LoTR books either, innerbrat. It's a closely-held secret of mine.. It's dangerous to say in public! I respect them, but I sure as hell wouldn't read them for fun.)

[deceptica]

Bah, anti-hype.

I'm not a fan of hype either, but I can't really get mad at people for being all excited, happy and bouncy about something. They are not hurting anyone.

Anti-hype on the other hand... I have no problem with people not liking things I like or the other way round, but what's with all the hatred? Nobody forces you to buy or read the next book. Spouting hate tirades about it just to be different from the people on your friends list is not cool.

[farraige.livejournal.com]

I have too much respect for my brain to plough through the formulaic, cleverly marketed commercial crap that is J.K. Rowling's or Terry Pratchett's literature. While it may do for 10-year-olds (I seem to have been completely indiscriminate to what printed material I absorbed then), a 30-year-old is likely to die of embarrassment before a book is finished.

[conuly]

I don't think dying of embarassment is a realistic goal. I certainly never have, and I know people older than I am who never have.

People read friggin' romances in public, they're going to get embarassed over reading Pterry and JKR?

[mhari.livejournal.com]

Rarrr. I despise the kind of literary snobbery that dismisses something as shit just because it's popular. It's a bare step up from the kiddies who shop at Hot Topic because they want to be OMGrebellious!!!1

"Lookit me, I have SUPERIOR TASTES!" Fuck 'em.

I don't deny that JKR needs a few blue pencils, but they're not the tripe these snots make them out to be.

[sgt-pooh.livejournal.com]

I am a Children's Literature major. I was and still am a reader. I've studied what makes good literature, but in the end, it's what's being read that makes the difference. Literature comes alive when it's shared. JMHO
I grew up when reading wasn't the "thing". You'd never catch kids reading, ever. Except for me, of course, but I was always the weird, smart kid. LOL JKR may not be the best author in the world(that would be Tolkien, in my book), but she did make it ok for kids to read, so for that I salute her.
I would have never picked the series up, if it hadn't been for the hype surrounding the first book. I read all banned books I know about, it's just a thing I have to do. I loved it. I gave a HB copy to my 8 year-old for her birthday that year. She never got HB, so that was a statement in favor of the book right there.
I teach Jr. High and all of my kids read! It excites me to no end. :) They are reading HP and "Unfortunate Events" and lots of other things. I love HP myself, but the "Unfortunate" series? Ug. Would I tell them it's drivel? Never. It's not my cup of tea, but if they like it...
I cringed through my child reading Babysitter's Club and Goosebumps. I never stopped her from reading it, I just knew there was better stories out there. She's found them now. We read together. I read books first, she reads them, then we discuss. Everything from "Catcher in the Rye", "Lord of the Flies", LOTR, to HP. It's lovely. We love the HP series most of all at the moment. It's fun for us and and THAT is all that matters.



btw, I love Terry Pratchett, too. It's great escapist literature. I have yet to die of embarrassment and I'm 38. No offense.

[missfahrenheit.livejournal.com]

I love HP and Pratchett because they're so wonderfully escapist. Mind you, I also think they are well-written, if only because they're so wonderfully, amazingly absorbing. I've just re-read Feet of Clay and am absolutely amazed at how every single piece fits together. You can probably say the same for HP as a whole, because even though there are plot holes there's more clues and foreshadowing than you can shake a stick at.

I do love ASOUE, and for me I think it's Snicket's/Hander's writing style. The actual plots are paper-thin (barring the mystery of VFD!), but the way they're written is so quirky and wonderfully unusual that I keep going back to them :)

[the-lady-aurora.livejournal.com]

I love all of the Terry Pratchett Discworld books. I'm 40 and read and re-read them constantly.

As for HP: I read the first 4 one after the other and enjoyed them. Waited for the paperback of the last one and can't get into it at all. I've tried on a number of occasions and I'm still only about 30 pages in. It doesn't seem to be as well written as the others but I think my main problem is the character names - some of them just seem incredibly childish and for some reason it really grates on my nerves.

Must really persevere - I've been told it's worth it.

[conuly]

You know what? The first part of that book goes on forever. Try skipping ahead to the train ride, see if you like the book better then.