Harry Potter was badly written

[Stackys]

I’ve seen this said on here a few times, that the books are badly written and she’s a terrible author who just got lucky.

Why do people say this? The world she created was amazing, what’s wrong with the books?

@distantsky-I think people will always find something to be aggrieved over. Most European cultures have goblins in them, typically depicted as having big noses. They are usually associated with hoarding gold and jewels, so make perfect bankers.

Also find it odd people are saying she ‘copied’ from any books about magic/magical schools..

Someone worked out that there are only seven basic plots to any story (The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories, Christopher Booker) although there's bit of a debate over whether it's just seven or if there's a couple more. So authors will inevitably produce works with similarities to other works.

JKR has certainly been inspired by several earlier novels, and there's well established trope in fantasy that runs:

• Young hero shows magical promise
• Our hero is taught magic in a formal setting
• Our hero gets cocky and releases an evil which brings about a great loss
• Our hero begins a long preparation to face his evil, with periods of self-doubt
• Hero conquers evil, receives scar/mark/disfigurement

It's Ged from The Wizard of Earthsea, it's Rincewind from Discworld (although he doesn't complete the whole story arc), and it's Harry.

There's nothing wrong with these similarities, and I'd really wish it would inspire people to go off and read some of these other books. The Wizard of Earthsea is a great series, written by another female author (Ursula Le Guin).

@distantsky people are ignorant of fairy tale tropes and the cho chan thing has been dismissed here extensively on previous threads.

I think the endless putting of Harry Potter through a woke filter is beyond tiresome.

Dunno, I loved reading them. I'd love to be able to do something badly like that and get paid that much money.

Many of her ideas are derivative (The Worst Witch, Earthsea, The Dark is Rising, Narnia stories and others) and overall there is relatively little character development, especially for the main three children. They are plot driven romps and there's a noticeable difference in how bloated the books get after book three which I think is the point at which the stories were picked up by the film studios? After that point it was as if the editors were terrified to suggest a bit of trimming.

But her use of English language with bits of Latin chucked in just for fun is very imaginative in lots of places and she's probably encouraged several boys to read fiction who might not have otherwise. And she does use her world to address a few real world issues to some extent.

Some of the adult characters are better realised than some of the children to me but they are fun escapism if you look past all that. I can't help wondering what a Harry Potter world based novel where Draco or Luna or Sirius were the central characters would look like....

I love the HP books and so do millions of others. Some high brow novels which are supposed to be ‘well written’ are actually tortuously boring and dull as ditchwater. I can think of several Booker prize wining novels which I’d put in that category as they sent me to sleep. I’d take HP over those every time,.

Read them as a you g teen and loved them, read them as an adult and yeah they're pretty much trash as far as literature goes, but they're fun and remind of the wonderful little head adventures of reading them young and imagining being at Hogwarts etc.

Take them for what they are basic and fun dont try to read into them or look for angry technical brilliance

Goblet of fire is great and not too long!

I like the development of the characters and how it evolves into how they come of age and develop relationships with each other....this takes up more space but that's ok with me

Makes and females of all ages love the books. There will always be people who can create plot holes and ruin things, but there's aren't many books like Harry Potter who suit boys and girls age 6 - 90 to read and enjoy that much. That's a real talent

Harry Potter and The Worst Witch have very little in common, beyond magic+ boarding school. You may as well claim that the Trebizon school book author was ripping off the Chalet school books because they each are set in a girls boarding school.

However, if you want to see a real rip off, look at the Hyper Space High books. They are basically Harry Potter, without Voldemort, but in space!

The author has even copied character personalities, from Draco Malfoy, right down to the headmaster who is a poor man's Dumbledore. And my son loves them.

A book's main purpose is to be read. In that she is successful beyond any other author of our time.
If you consider the complete move away from books into a culture of multi media as a negative thing for our children then she has done more than anybody to help prevent this. If you think that she is never going to win any literature prizes then best to read acclaimed literature. Start with the acclaimed book 'milkman' and see how you feel after reading a 'properly written book', if you can actually read it. Follow it with other acclaimed books. The complexity of language in Satanic Verses actually makes it porely written. If it is so difficult to understand for the majority of people it is not 'well written' as it misses its purpose to be a book.

It's all snobbery, jealousy and envy. HP met its purpose and gave enjoyment to millions and inspired a generation to actually read a book. Don't believe the hype of the literary critics, or they might start believing their own hype.

It's telling that JK hasn't really had literary success beyond HP and I think that's because she's limited as a writer

Five Cormoran Strike books in the last seven years. Isn’t that prolific enough for you? With The Casual Vacancy that’s 13 novels, plus all the HP spin offs - Fantastic Beasts, Beadle the Bard, etc. She’s only 55. How prolific and successful are all you writers who don’t have JKR’s limited skills?

Writers who’ve commented negatively maybe need a more realistic view of the publishing industry and potential readership. JKR clearly knows her market(s). She’s never claimed to be a literary writer, but it’s ridiculous to say she’s not good at what she does.

Her Robert Galbraith books fly off the shelves ( or on kindle) ! To say she isn't successful is like saying Steven Hendry could only hit the red balls in snooker or Roger Federer can 'only ' hit a tennis ball!
I think she has been a victim of the British disease , be very good at what you do and become wealthy then everyone can have a go at you! We always like to build them up then knock them down again in the UK.
Sad really.

I’m dyslexic and found JKRowling’s style of writing in Harry Potter very easy to read. The Harry Potter story was intricate and well told. I’ve watched the Strike episodes on BBC iplayer and enjoyed them too so have bought the books.

@DarklyDreamingDexter

I love the HP books and so do millions of others. Some high brow novels which are supposed to be ‘well written’ are actually tortuously boring and dull as ditchwater. I can think of several Booker prize wining novels which I’d put in that category as they sent me to sleep. I’d take HP over those every time,.

Fully agree with that. Some of the books I had to read may have been delightful for academics but tortuous for those reading for pleasure. I think it's another classic example of the divide/chasm between academia and real life.

The HP books served their audience - they were for the entertainment of children, who wouldn't have noticed poor grammar etc. No they'll never (hopefully) be studied in formal exams, but that wasn't what they were written for.

I despair when reading some award winning novels which were clearly written to win awards rather than for the entertainment/pleasure of the reader.

I also think it's a similar style of literary snobbery that turns kids off reading in schools, especially secondary school. Books are dissected to within an inch of their lives so the pleasure of reading is sucked out of the students.

I love her books and so do many others to the extent that shes a millionaire. The stories are fantastic.
I wish I was that bad at writing

Given they were books written for children I think they were fine, with the notable exception of the Deathly Hallows aka The Wizarding Worlds Worst Camping Trip, which required a much heavier hand from her editors.

She's certainly a good world builder and character builder.

My mum loved Catherine Cookson books but I thought they were awful and really grim. She also read much more 'high brow ' literature and non fiction history books too , a real mix. She would have liked the Strike novels but not HP.
We all have different tastes in reading. It's like music ; I like everything but I can't stand jazz although I've been told I'm ' missing out' !

Look, I love the Harry Potter books. I do. I just don't see the problem with seeing their limitations for what they are?

I write. My brother writes. My mum and my aunt are both published authors (my aunt is award winning). My friend is a published writer.

I KNOW that writing a good book doesn't require slavish adherence to the rules. I KNOW that popularity isn't predicated on perfect prose quality.

I can still, as an adult, see where the books are flawed, her world building is flawed, and where some really light-touch editing would improve them without drastically altering her style.

Are people really so bloody simple that they ONLY see it in terms of, 'duh, of course she's brilliant you silly-billy' because she's sold billions? You don't hear the same about Fifty Shades...

(And I really, really kick against a lot of the 'rules' of writing. You need to know them, and you need to know when to put the damn things down and tell a good story without fretting about adverbs.)

It's all snobbery, jealousy and envy. HP met its purpose and gave enjoyment to millions and inspired a generation to actually read a book. Don't believe the hype of the literary critics, or they might start believing their own hype.

I really hate this kind of take on it. It's ok if people just don't like the book. It's only a book, not the second coming of Christ and however many millions of copies she's sold won't make non-Potterheads enjoy the books any more.

Starbucks is also very popular, yet many people don't like it. Let people like what they like and dislike what they don't.

@SionnachRua

It's all snobbery, jealousy and envy. HP met its purpose and gave enjoyment to millions and inspired a generation to actually read a book. Don't believe the hype of the literary critics, or they might start believing their own hype.

I really hate this kind of take on it. It's ok if people just don't like the book. It's only a book, not the second coming of Christ and however many millions of copies she's sold won't make non-Potterheads enjoy the books any more.

Starbucks is also very popular, yet many people don't like it. Let people like what they like and dislike what they don't.

I would also add that whilst it's great that she undoubtedly increased both the popularity of reading, acting as if reading wouldn't have happened without it is just daft.

And it's hardly great that she created a generation of fanatics who can't engage with her works critically whilst still enjoying them (she has said as much herself about the people who are dogmatic about Snape and Malfoy as characters). That's creating a cult, not a generation of readers.

Honestly, if I were a tenth as successful as a writer I would enjoy character debates and nuanced discussions and critical comparison of my works more than anything.

I suppose it all comes down to what one wants from a book that is ‘well written’ for me well written means I’m drawn into the story, can’t put the book down and when it’s finished feel like I’ve lost something/can’t stop thinking about it. Harry Potter fulfilled that for me, another stand out one that also did it was ‘we need to talk about Kevin’

I’ll never be the kind of person who reads a book and stops to count how many time’s a word or adverb has been used or to ponder if cho Chang is two surnames and have that matter to me.

So it’s not surprising I can’t see eye to eye with a lot of posters here on HP. How I define well written does not come down to counting words on a page and isn’t based on how many semi colons there are.

Maybe the reason writers think they’re badly written is because they’re obsessed with ‘form’ and structure rather than story and enjoyment.

@QuarantineDream

For those saying she owes a lot to LOTR, I hope you're all aware how much Tolkien nicked from Old English and Middle English texts. He wasn't that original either.

Tolkien nicked nothing. Anyone who has studied Anglo-Saxon and Norse mythology will certainly see the influence in his books ("Middle Earth") for one, but I think the comparison with JK Rowling ends right there. To illustrate my point I would say this:

Harry Potter = Frodo.
Ron Weasley = Sam.
Voldemort = Sauron.
Dumbledore = Gandalf.
Death Eaters = the Ringwraiths.
Horcruxes = The One Ring.
Hogwarts is No Longer Safe = The Shire is No Longer Safe.

I would challenge anyone to make the same comparison between Tolkien and the ancient stories he is alleged to have copied.