4 ms·

I respectfully disagree. Harry Potter isn't considered "good" among critics, it's not a literature masterpiece. The same is true for other arts, like cinema and

by inerte 17y ago

I respectfully disagree. Harry Potter isn't considered "good" among critics, it's not a literature masterpiece. The same is true for other arts, like cinema and music. The top sellers usually aren't considered the best. "Wanted", as in the audience wants to consume, yes. Maybe good enough; for the mass market. But it all depends from what angle you approach the conversation. Tastes are hard to discuss. Your last paragraph ignores the "everything else" that constitutes a product and its surrounding business. Things like price, marketing, design, distribution deals, costs, market share potential, competitors, etc... it's not enough to simply have a good product; or even a perfect one, if such thing was possible.

jordanb 17y ago
Potter isn't a literary masterpiece, but it is solidly written. Rowling managed to write some really complex and interesting characters, which is difficult for any writer and is often missing in Fantasy. There's a big division between popular writing and literary writing, and people who write the latter can get up their own asses a bit sometimes about popular authors. But they still recognize that the popular authors often really do have skill. It reminds me of a Jazz musician I was speaking with a bit ago. We got on the subject of Brittney Spears, and he said that he doesn't like her style of music but he acknowledges that she does takes a lot of skill, and that a lot of people try to imitate her and fail. What literary people can't fathom isn't the success of Rowling (or King or Crichton etc). What they can't fathom is the success of Dan Brown, a man who seems to lack any discernible trace of talent.
- cakesy 17y ago
  So what you are saying is Harry Potter is not a masterpiece, but it is not crap either. Therefore it is good. Sure, HP is great for kids. For adults, you have to be an idiot. I know it is popular these days to never grow up, and reading HP is just an extension of this.

by inerte 17y ago

jordanb 17y ago

Potter isn't a literary masterpiece, but it is solidly written. Rowling managed to write some really complex and interesting characters, which is difficult for any writer and is often missing in Fantasy. There's a big division between popular writing and literary writing, and people who write the latter can get up their own asses a bit sometimes about popular authors. But they still recognize that the popular authors often really do have skill. It reminds me of a Jazz musician I was speaking with a bit ago. We got on the subject of Brittney Spears, and he said that he doesn't like her style of music but he acknowledges that she does takes a lot of skill, and that a lot of people try to imitate her and fail. What literary people can't fathom isn't the success of Rowling (or King or Crichton etc). What they can't fathom is the success of Dan Brown, a man who seems to lack any discernible trace of talent.

cakesy 17y ago
So what you are saying is Harry Potter is not a masterpiece, but it is not crap either. Therefore it is good. Sure, HP is great for kids. For adults, you have to be an idiot. I know it is popular these days to never grow up, and reading HP is just an extension of this.