2018 School Spending Survey Report
>Waiting for Harry
>The reporters are calling again, looking for a new Harry Potter story.
As for another frequent question, I really have no idea whether Harry Potter will be widely read in twenty years. One journalist floated the notion that once All Is Revealed, the series' cultural capital will be spent, but knowing that Frodo succeeds in his quest hasn't stopped fans from reading Lord of the Rings over and over again. There is an interesting comparison there, I think, but more for its differences than similarities: while both Harry Potter and the Tolkien books are multi-volume fantasy tales of an unlikely hero shouldering the weight of the world, Lord of the Rings for years was what you read if you were cool (at least, that's what its readers thought) or if you were a dork (that's what its scorners thought). The mass-market success of the Peter Jackson movies (and a Harry-wrought fantasy-friendly zeitgeist) might have changed that, but Harry Potter has been a crowd-pleaser from the start. You don't read Harry because that's what the cool kids are reading, but because that's what everyone is reading. (And I've never seen popular taste so ferociously defended. Tell people you don't like John Grisham, fine. Tell 'em you don't like Harry, and it's as if you have insulted humanity.)
The review copy of the latest Harry should arrive Saturday morning [correction: the 20th] at my house, from whence it will swiftly be retrieved by the assigned reviewer. When she's done, then we'll have some news.
Added To Cart
RELATED
RECOMMENDED
Please register with us to continue reading.
ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER? LOG IN
We are currently offering this content for free. Sign up now to activate your personal profile, where you can save articles for future viewing.
ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER? LOG IN
Thank you for visiting.
We’ve noticed you are using a private browser. To continue, please log in or create an account.
Add Comment :-
Comment Policy:
Comment should not be empty !!!
Kelly
>Again, a late comment due to lack of internet when abroad...One thing that seems to be missing in all these discussions about why HP is popular, it seems to me, is character and setting. Rowling's greatest strengths as a writer are character development and setting. In this way, she's much like Dickens. Also, like Dickens, because of these skills she's managed to create a fan base--a number of readers who are willing to spend the night outdoors (not me, I bought my copy at 6am in an Edinburgh train station--no way was I going to queue on Princess Street at midnight) waiting for the latest installmet. Yes, her words could be edited down. But, so could Dickens's novels. Ever read A Tale of Two Cities? Great novel, but the first 100 pages are totally unnecessary. SO WHAT? We still read them. What the hell is with the carping about it? Don't like it? Don't read it. Take up some Russian Lit instead. Each short story has an extra 50 pages.
Posted : Jul 24, 2007 03:29
Saipan Writer
>I'm an HP fan. Roger objects: "Every scene, character, action, motive, and joke was described and explained, frequently more than once. There was nothing for me to do." I understand the objection, and can agree in part. Because Rowling does do that a lot.But there are still things for the reader to do. For example, analyze the characters. Is Snape friend or foe? (The debate rages on this point.) For example, imagine future plot points--what is the last horcrux going to be? Is RAB really Regulus Black? Why did Fortescue disappear? And so on.
And these are the kind of puzzles I enjoy. (Although I am not a fan of Tolkein or most other fantasy.)
As to the lasting quality of the books, who knows. Perhaps the series will be like Treasure Island--popular in its day, but of less enduring quality.
Or perhaps there's a universal appeal that will transcend time, make the books classics, and forever ruin them for future generations. (haha!)
Nice discussion, here. I have my own pathetic predictions on my blog, for those who just can't get enough Harry.
And thanks, Roger, for the chance to count down a few more minutes in the LONG anticipation of the Deathly Hallows.
Posted : Jul 20, 2007 07:01
Anonymous
>Yes, if you like Rowling, then by all means read Tolkien. And if you like Tolkien, then maybe you should check out Wagner. And if you like Wagner then maybe you should read the Norse myths. And so on and so on. Each have their pleasures, some deeper than others, and the point is that (happily) you needn't give up one to pick up the other.Posted : Jul 14, 2007 10:28
Melinda
>When I saw my cousin (a wrestler who has no interest in books that I have ever seen) carrying around "Phoenix," -- and he was halfway through it -- I was impressed beyond words.Even if I didn't like HP (which I do), that alone would have made me take up the banner for it!
Posted : Jul 14, 2007 09:57
Garret Freymann-Weyr
>Well. . . as my husband is producing an endless stream of Harry stories at work, I don't have much to say about the fuss. But you can say that you are not a Harry fan if you explain why. I have told many a room full of 7th or 8th graders that it is derivative and that they should read the source material: P.L. Travers, Tolkien, Tom Brown's School Days, etc. Their eyes get very big, but I am told that a lot of them go and read, at the very least, Mary Poppins. It is true that I don't say anything to grownups. I rather feel it is too late for them.Posted : Jul 14, 2007 07:39