Why did Harry Potter become so popular?

[KindergartenKop]

I'm not a huge fan personally, but I think they're quite well written. I'm not sure they deserve all the hype though. So why did they become so popular?

"I don't get why adults read it - even allowing for the US version, it's a children's book."

But why does anybody read anything? I read because I want to be taken out of my own world for a bit. JKR offered something fun and immersive which made long commutes a bit more bearable.

@Pythonista

I don't know - it was an ebook sample.

I don't get why adults read it - even allowing for the US version, it's a children's book.

And how did they cast three child actors who couldn't act?

It’s very, very difficult to cast three experienced yet unknown children to lead a film franchise. Who would you have preferred instead?

@Pythonista

I don't know - it was an ebook sample.

I don't get why adults read it - even allowing for the US version, it's a children's book.

And how did they cast three child actors who couldn't act?

I disagree about Rupert Grint, I think he was always well cast. I also think he was the strongest actor of the three.

Daniel Radcliffe wasn't bad either.

Emma whatsherface however couldn't act but improved as the films went on .

I think all three were cast as they fit what JKR saw in her head as Harry, Ron and Hermione.

Wow, that blogger really has a talent for bland prose. Nothing anyone could possibly object to in his rewritten sentences but also just the most mediocre way possible to convey the information (much less information than JKR).

@JojobaFromOctober

Wow, that blogger really has a talent for bland prose. Nothing anyone could possibly object to in his rewritten sentences but also just the most mediocre way possible to convey the information (much less information than JKR).

There are some suggestions in the comments about better ways to convey the heroine's age than stating them in the first sentence:

So apparently it would have been better if JKR wrote:

“Robin walked past the rows of shop windows lining Picadilly Circus, briefly catching her youthful reflection limned in the soft glow of streetlights. She flicked her blonde tresses, shifting a handful of soft bouncy curls back into place.”

or
“Matthew looked at Robin, a grin creased his handsome face. “What’s so funny?” she asked. “You,” he said. “You don’t look a day over fifty.” Robin smiled back, “Ha ha, then I must be remarkably well-preserved since I still look like I’m in my twenties.” Matthew reached over and gently moved a blonde curl away from Robin’s blushing face. “I love you,” he whispered. “Whether twenty-five or fifty.” She smacked his hand away. “And I love you Mr. Thompson.”

Now, I hate both passages, for reasons I won't ennumate - enough derailing. But I am amazed at the gall of people who pop up and claim that "the rules" say this is better writing than just telling us how old a character is in a sentence with a few clearly connected clauses.

Must do some work and not start reading any more of that blog ...

I thought the first book in the series, for example, was really well-structured, the way there was an element of magic in the world, and then the magic took over and became the reality. The books are very visual. It's enjoyable to imagine the different wands on sale in the shop, etc. I always wonder if a publisher helped with the structuring, because sometimes stories by very imaginative writers get over-elaborate in their description.

Probably true what people comment about the film's. Finding Daniel Radcliffe must have been a huge help in making the stories real. He is so suitable. You can enjoy reading the books more because you have the actors in your mind. I think all of the main characters are well-cast.

Yes, because there is a limit to how popular stories can become, if kids don't enjoy reading. The films prompted them to read, perhaps.

@Clymene

I wonder how many of the people criticising the books fir being badly written are best selling authors?

They're children's books.

I see that the straw man has risen.

Rowling is an absolute genius at plotting. She sets up all these tiny little things along the way that in the end play a central role. The pacing of the books is excellent as well; there aren't long, drawn-out lulls in action, just little bits of quiet to add shade to the story. So when you're reading you're drawn in.

I was 16 when I found the first two books, and then waited excitedly for my school to get the others. (Never queued at midnight like some of my friends, though!)

Agree with others that there is a lot of appeal in the magical meeting the mundane.

We're reading them now with our children and I actually can't stand the bits in the school. I hate how the adults treat the children - if I had children at Hogwarts I'd constantly be complaining about how terrible the teachers are.

I read them in my early 20s and loved them, especially the first one. They were quite addictive: I remember visiting my then-boyfriend and making him wait while I finished the 2nd one which I'd been reading on the train.

I lived above a Waterstones and also remember a whole group of us going down at midnight slightly tipsy to buy the next one in the series (maybe 3rd or 4th).

For me, it's not just the magical world but the idea of being rescued from reality and hardship, turning out to be special. Don't most children long for that?

As the narrative arc in the series grew, I actually felt it lost some of that wonder as it disconnected from the real/Muggle world and the boarding-school antics. Still read them all though and delighted DS has enjoyed the books and now working his way through the films.

Not a straw man @FrippEnos
Surely if you're able to criticise an author for being a poor writer, you can either a) can come up with some examples of said poor writing and/or b) demonstrate your ability to write much more eloquently and be as successful?

If you're unable to do either of those things, you're just making a statement with nothing to back it up.

“Robin walked past the rows of shop windows lining Picadilly Circus, briefly catching her youthful reflection limned in the soft glow of streetlights. She flicked her blonde tresses, shifting a handful of soft bouncy curls back into place.”

This reads like something from a poorly written romance novel that’s trying to be smart. I can’t believe someone thought this was a better version, regardless of how clunky JKR’s was.

Clymene

Its called having an opinion so no need to back it up.

Where as you seem to think that in order to criticise someone you have to (In this case) be a published author.

As I have said, I think that part of her success is that she doesn't go for the standard literary prose and this appeals to many people .

I don't get why adults read it - even allowing for the US version, it's a children's book.

And? I hate it when people tell others what is or isn't appropriate to read.

I'm reading them with my 6 year old at the moment. It's been wonderful to see him really get into them and ask to go to bed early so we can get in more reading time.

This is going off at a tangent but I'm not sure that there is a better way to convey someone's age than by saying how old they are. It's efficient and leaves no room for confusion.

I clicked through to the blogpost. I can't say I'm a massive fan of that first sentence, but what on earth is the blogger going on about when they say "admit it, you didn't even understand it the third time you read it"? Do they struggle with basic comprehension?

@ClumpingBambooIsALie

This is going off at a tangent but I'm not sure that there is a better way to convey someone's age than by saying how old they are. It's efficient and leaves no room for confusion.

It's intruding on the narrative, interrupting the action, and dragging the reader out of the story, apparently.

So don't say - Harry woke up on the morning of his eleventh birthday.

Do say - Harry sat up, hitting his head on the ceiling. "Until I turned ten, one year ago exactly, I could sit up straight in this cupboard", he mused ...

@ClumpingBambooIsALie

I clicked through to the blogpost. I can't say I'm a massive fan of that first sentence, but what on earth is the blogger going on about when they say "admit it, you didn't even understand it the third time you read it"? Do they struggle with basic comprehension?

They've been taught that good writing = short sentences by underpaid US profs doing damage limitation. Short sentences are clear. Therefore JKR's not extraordinarily long sentence is unclear. Hence, you struggle to read it. You're just in denial.

Those people may be writers to some readers' tastes. But they're definitely not readers.

🤣

@CareerConcerns1999

That’s not true at all. The films were not brought out until the third book and there was already a huge following.

It’s the mix of magic, boarding school, imagination and good writing (I know people love a bash JK Rowling’s writing thread). Also if you were the right age you grew up with the stories. It was also the anticipation of waiting for the next one.

I feel sad that there is a whole wonderful world of literary voices and styles out there and writers joyfully playing with and doing clever things with them, and these poor bloggers can’t see anything beyond a set of narrow rules.
I am sure you’re right about damage limitation and you are definitely right, they’re not readers.

It’s very, very difficult to cast three experienced yet unknown children to lead a film franchise. Who would you have preferred instead?

It is. But not all child actors are bad though - all the children in Game of Thrones were spectacularly good, and at such a young age.

@Pythonista

It’s very, very difficult to cast three experienced yet unknown children to lead a film franchise. Who would you have preferred instead?

It is. But not all child actors are bad though - all the children in Game of Thrones were spectacularly good, and at such a young age.

The youngest child actors in GoT weren’t responsible for 95% of the programme though.

The actors are bad because JKR insisted on British unknowns. Daniel had a little bit of professional experience but not much. Emma and Rupert had some amateur experience at best.

No but they were responsible for some pretty deep scenes in an adult drama, not a children's film.

The point being that there are talented child actors out there but they chose less talented ones due to looking right

Again, GOT - young unknown Brits. There are plenty (eg someone like Tiger Drew Honey, Emily Jones, who are super talented .