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?

I found the books dull and so did my daughter who is an excellent reader usually. What really put me off though is the stereotype about Harry's cousin. The fact that he is fat and spoilt and lazy. I'm appalled that such a good author (as many people think she is) could damage an overweight child's self esteem like this and encourage other children to view overweight people in this way.

She has got alot to thank the worst witch and LOTR for
Well as far as the latter is concerned, not nearly as much as George R R Martin has.

Lifeisgenerallyfun but with classical, historical etc references, they have to be unnoticeable for those who don't know about them - otherwise they would make the reading experience hard and offputting, if understanding them was needed to make it make sense. You have to be able to ignore them. So I see them as a nice extra layer of fun for those in the know. (And I'm sure I'm only in the know about some of it - eg I get a lot of refs to folklore and alchemy, probably fewer of the classical ones)

English teachers will also be able to pick up where the writing isn’t good.
Just in their opionion though.

Rowling was writing children's books and some people judge her writing by adult standards. She got so many children reading who may not have done so quite as enthusiastically, especially boys, if one is allowed to say that, and for that she is to be congratulated.

@WestendVBroadway

I haven't RTFT yet, but *@Bluesheep8*, that is exactly what I came here to say. It is just The worst witch, with a gender swap!

I read a few of The Worst Witch books last year, and aside from the fact that they’re both set in magical boarding schools, I’m really not seeing the similarity.

I'm another one who can't see the similarities between Harry Potter and The Worst Witch. Other than being set in wizarding boarding schools and therefore having broomsticks and studying potions, they don't really have anything in common.

I agree about the fat = lazy/stupid/selfish Dursley thing. That was so unnecessary.

Boarding school books and "apprentice magician" books are both so common as to be genres, so I can't get too bothered about the idea not being original. A few years before the Worst Witch, A Wizard of Earthsea came out - not the same thing at all, but also about learning to be a witch/wizard.

If JK was a bit derivative, it's certainly nothing compared to the gazillions of copycats since! OMG, so tiresome.

@Judashascomeintosomemoney

Agree!

This thread is driving me crazy. People are commenting who have no idea what good writing is. JK Rowling is a phenomenal writer. Reading HP is not the same as reading clever adult literature obviously but would this type of writing reach a modern-day ten year old boy? No. The thing about adverbs is a complete red herring. As are similarities with other works. Nothing is original, everything is inspired by something else. And anyway, she's a genius. There's not a kids author out there that touches her for characterisation, imagination, story-telling and plot. Whatsmore, her prose is good. It's readable and flows really well. Publish a book, sell a few million copies and then judge.

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.

They are quite possibly jealous that she has made millions from her writing. (Sorting) hats off to her.
I am a linguist and I enjoyed reading her books very much.
Dan Brown on the other hand....shudder.

Funny how nicking from other books is only an issue when a woman dies it.

@Cadent

Who said that? Can't see that comment???

People who slag HP off are usually book snobs who think they're above reading it or forget the series is meant for children and hence sentence structure and language etc can't really be compared to Anna Karenina or Moby bloody Dick!

I tried to read Moby Dick once.

The plot and storytelling in the Harry Potter books is much better IMO.

I loved them I spite of the writing in places. I never got why Harry "raised his eyebrows" so much ...! Also the acting the the earlier films especially was awful, but could have been greatly improved with better editing. I read the books when they first came out as a kid and can still remember so much of them, they really captured imagination of a generation (and the next one!)

I just love the plots and the characters and Mrs Weasley (one of my favorites) and how it all comes together for the big finale! I was a bit meh about Hermoine and Ron as that would never ever work, but it was good to follow their journeys. I felt sorry for him most of the time!

I tried to read Moby Dick once
That one’s easy compared to trying to decipher Joseph’s utterances in Wuthering Heights!

She's borrowing from T. H. White. But you can do that with fantasy. It's like a fridge that everyone borrows out of. The collection of fantastical elements.

It doesn't matter if it's not perfectly written. Anyone who creates a book that enthralls people on a wide scale, provided they're not doing it through shock tactics or titillation, is clearly very very good at something.

I tried to read Moby Dick once

Only once! I've tried lots of times, and never got very far.

quality of writing isn't a single axis. there's an axis of quality that wins the Booker Prize, or the Nobel Prize for literature, but that most people don't want to read because it is demanding and requires brain thought to follow and appreciate the artistry. Separately, there is popular writing that people enjoy reading, and if that's what one is aiming to create and one succeeds on the scale that JKR did then its bloody arrogant to say its poor quality, even if it never does get a major literature prize. its Hula Hoops vs langoustine linguine. The latter may take a lot of skill and artistry to make it just perfect but it will never appeal to everyone, and sometimes we just fancy hula hoops, so the former will be more popular. the criticisms of JKRs prose are valid especially in the later books, but she has achieved popular books that get kids hooked on reading and that is brilliant.

yin

Well it might be bad popular literature...

I do agree broadly.

They're fine for kids. Children aren't too bothered about too many adverbs, repetition or annoying alliterations, they just appreciate the story.

Harry Potter is the pinnacle of English compared to 50 Shades.

Fuck me, they're dire.

We had the "pleasure" of hearing The Half-Blood Prince" and "Deathly Hallows" in the car recently on the way to Scotland and back (from North Kent)

I hate them, she is waffling with too much details not relating to the actual storyline, the books could be cut in 1/2 and don't start me on Order of the Phoenix.

I love the idea behind HP, I love the fact that DD is drawn into a magical world and follows the story and enjoys all kind of additional material. I think JKR managed to draw children into reading where - at that time - not a lot of authors did. The earlier books caused DH to miss motorway exits as he was not looking at the Sat-nav because he listened to the stories. But book 5-7? sorry, it seems no editor wanted to say anything negative to her.

But if I have to listen to more CDs in the car I may not be responsible for my action.