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?

Oh and that god awful play! Albus Severus is a TERRIBLE name - there’s too many S’s for it to flow properly when it’s said out loud.

@Bluesheep8

I've only read one. Lots of things were just copied from a book I read and loved as a child - The Worst Witch. I couldn't get past that I'm afraid

This is my problem with it. I don't think it's badly written but I don't think it's particularly original either. There are no new ideas in it. But maybe that's why it's so well loved and they're kids books after all, no matter how many adults put their Hogswarts house in their social media bio's.

I do like her Strike books though.

She isn't Hilary Mantell, her books are children's fantasy, there is a difference.
My niece loved the books and they really helped her to start reading properly on her own because she couldn't wait to see what happened next.
I loved the books even though I usually prefer to read weightier things.

Warmsausagetea, they've been on BBC iplayer (cormoran strike) and are fairly watchable.

Im snobby about the writing but a good editor could fix that.
The stories are decent enough.

Im quite a fan of school stories anyway - angela Brazil etc. I liked the juxtaposition.

Yabu. I couldn't read the books, they were poorly written. I loved the films though but I think that's massively down to the film production team rather than the author of the book.
I also loved Narnia films and books for someone up thread who said they didnt like those.
I think it depends on a person's reading style, there are some books I've bought/downloaded, started reading and though "fuck this it's a nightmare" but the reviews are brilliant.

I've not read it and just picked up snippets from here and there, but there are have been accusations that her work is very derivative and I've been told that her use of English is somewhat stilted and facile, even for children's books.I believe some direct claims of plagiarism have been made by other authors.

She had a character called Vlabatsky, whose name I assume was 'inspired' by occultist/theosophist Helena Blavatsky. I don't know if there were any others. I've heard that she used names of 'real' demons - no idea if that's true or not. Dan Brown did something similar by giving his character the highly unusual surname of Teabing, which happens to be an anagram of Michael Baigent's surname, who wrote similar material but in non-fiction form long before Brown did.

‘Children care more about plot and characters than they do about sentence structure! I still don’t get why so many adults love the books though.‘

Because when you look at most of the high selling genre fiction, you can see caring more about plot than style isn’t a children thing particularly!

I'm a writer. She's great and I think it's disingenuous to suggest that she got lucky, or that it's all plot and no style. She wouldn't have been so successful if she didn't have a good plot, great characters and an appealing style of writing.
There are writers I can't get into because of their style- doesn't mean they're bad writers.

I tried to read them several times and found them completely boring. I've nevwr understood why people think they're so gripping, but then fantasy isn't a genre I'm into (before anyone questions my username, I was in the room working on an art project whilst DH watched the movie!)

I haven't read them for a while. They were basically fine as far as I remember.

Out of the 3 main kids I always wondered why Harry had literally no personality at all yet the other two were quite unique. That was my only issue in that the main character was a bit cardboard. Not helped later on by Daniel Radcliffes acting

She's a brilliant writer, but the books (particularly the later ones) are poorly edited. I assume they were trying to rush then out, and perhaps the editor didn't feel they were allowed to make major changes to such an important author.

Her storytelling, characterisation and world-creation are absolutely wonderful, they grab the imagination and are simple enough to appeal to children while still being clever enough for adults to enjoy.

People enjoy reading them and they sell well so she's a successful author. I've heard it said that they are written at about the level of a good year 6 writer, if they are then what's the problem - you write for your target audience don't you?

I think it depends on where you’re coming from.

The world building is fantastic - some of the best ever. The level of detail is amazing, and done with deft humour.

The themes are satisfying, and the drawing together of many complex plot strands is impressive.

That said - it’s not particularly great writing. She is over-reliant on cliches and often lazy stereotypes. Some characters are pretty two dimensional and flat. The prose is very conventional.

To my mind, the criticisms don’t really matter, because I’m not reading HP for literary greatness. I’m reading them because I want to be swept up in the amazing world created by the novels. It’s irrelevant to my enjoyment whether the writing is superb or just average, because as far as I’m concerned it does the job.

This sort of snobbishness really annoys me. Before Harry Potter lots of especially young male readers had nothing to engage with. JKR introduced millions of children to reading. And criticism of CS Lewis too. How many children escaped into his fantasy. For what it's worth I have a BA & a masters from an RG University in a foreign language, so lots of literature. I add that so no one can pop up & tell me I don't know what I'm talking about

Children care more about plot and characters than they do about sentence structure!

It's a woefully missed opportunity not to teach them better language skills whilst entertaining them, though. It's ironic that books for pre-schoolers are so heavily weighted in favour of teaching them solid basic language and vocabulary, with the actual story often playing second fiddle; but when children grow a little older, we often swing the other way and sacrifice good further language learning in favour of an exciting story. Surely it's possible to have both, though?

I understand that adults like reading the books as a bit of nostalgic escapism, but I really don't get the pretence that they aren't children's books, producing different covers for 'adult' versions and such. I sometimes like to re-visit my old children's books for memories and old-times' sake - Enid Blyton, The Three Investigators et al - but I never feel the need to try to justify that by insisting vehemently that they were written all along with a middle-aged adult reader in mind. I suppose a lot depends on whether adults like reading HP as a bit of a nostalgic distraction now and again between more age-appropriate books or whether they are the only fiction they ever read.

The books are pure escapism and I did enjoy reading them myself. I liked the storytelling and the fantasy.

That doesn't mean that they were the greatest literary works ever. They don't have to be that for me to enjoy them.

My now adult children loved the first few books then went off them a bit
Being a child of the 1950’s and 60’s I was struck by the similarity to the “ magic” stories in Enid Blyton. Especially the scene where the creatures are jumping out of a book. That was in an Enid Blyton story.

Aristotle said the 7 elements of good storytelling are (in order of importance)- plot, character, theme, dialogue, melody/chorus, environment and spectacle. Rowling ticks every single one of those boxes. Elegant English is a nice to have, but clearly not essential to great storytelling, and let's not forget they are written for children!

I had 15 lovely years of reading HP books aloud to my kids, first as they came out and then as age appropriate for DC2. They were huge fans.

However, JKR’s use of alliteration is shocking. Throughout the books it’s “Snape snarled” or “Harry hurried”. It became a standing joke.
But the most shocking was when Harry fell down the (auditorium?) “steep stone step after steep stone step”!

Sorry but howling with laughter at them being at the level of a good Y6 writer. I work in a good school with some exceptionally clever children and our Y6s definitely don't write at that level!

I'm a huge fan of all her books and looking forwards to the new Strike novel in September.
I've read the Potter books twice and I'm not a fantasy fan at all : I just liked the different characters and was intrigued as to how it would end. The WW2 references were carefully interwoven into the stories too I thought. She is brilliant , but the rows over her views on trans people may lose her many fans and I've a bet with myself that the new book with have many bad reviews ( I just love the two main characters in the Strike books , even if the actual plots are a bit lacking sometimes and actually rooting for them !)
Lots of other good authors around to read if you don't like her style of writing.

@whatswithtodaytoday

She's a brilliant writer, but the books (particularly the later ones) are poorly edited. I assume they were trying to rush then out, and perhaps the editor didn't feel they were allowed to make major changes to such an important author.

Her storytelling, characterisation and world-creation are absolutely wonderful, they grab the imagination and are simple enough to appeal to children while still being clever enough for adults to enjoy.

Totally agree.

I couldn't get on with Potter. Can see the attraction as a kids book but no idea why adults would bother.

However I absolutely love her Strike books. Thoroughly looking forward to 944 pages of the new one next month, although will be mentally editing as I go along (there's a few continuity errors from time to time too, but who cares?!)

The new book will be long then! I'll have to put lots of time aside as I tend to read them too quickly to get my Cormoran and Robin fix!

Hmmm - she doesn't write diversity at all well. All of the characters are a bit home counties middle class white kids (which I suppose is accurate for a boarding school). When characters from diverse backgrounds do appear, they are often badly stereotyped or a bit 'tokenistic'. I think that's a shame because it would be great if there were a broader sense of role models for many different types of children.

There are also several different plot points and details that have been more or less lifted from other places, Narnia, Tolkein, Blyton, the Worst Witch, to name a few. If I were feeling kind, I would say this is some kind of homage to well-loved stories.

However, I do think she is just marvellous. She's a great example of someone very successful who still really cares about the old JKR and the world she lived in before fame. I get the sense that she does want to make the world a better place, and she's very courageous in her quest for protecting womens' rights.