Harry Potter Sucks!
Technorati Tag(s): Books, Harry Potter, Opinion
You'll hate me for this: Harry Potter sucks.
Of course, that is my opinion, and it doesn't have to be yours.
I have only read the first book in passing, so most of my opinion is biased on personal prejudice without even reading the full series, anyway.
Harry Potter sucks for a multitude of reasons:
Really, read it as just a book and not something else: on a completely unsymbolic, plain story-for-sake-of-story level, and you just might find out how bland it really is. I could cough up a story like that in five minutes.
You might argue that it's still good entertainment, and I've got nothing against readnig only for entertainment. In fact, I abhor those pretentious boors who consider fiction as redundant and won't read anything that isn't Joyce or Pynchon or Delillo or Nabokov. Harry Potter doesn't entertain me. That's as plain as I can put it.
Reading through the first book I kept asking myself, why am I reading this? Why am I wasting my time? Why am I reading this when I could read something else?
I had no answer to coax me through.
And every brief synopsis about every sequel only assured me that I wasn't missing out on anything great.
Harry Potter may be getting people to read again, as John B. says here, and it's certainly a good thing, no doubt. For people who never read, Potter may certainly be a real treat for the imagination, but if Harry Potter is all they're reading, then that's a jolly shame.
posted by sutrix @ 1:48 PM
6 Comments:
For people who never read, Potter may certainly be a real treat for the imagination, but if Harry Potter is all they're reading, then that's a jolly shame.
I completely agree with this. The Potter books are fun (as is PotterMania!), but I wouldn't put them on my list of Life-Transforming Books. Without question, there are children's books dealing with the very heavy, very real issues of Good and Evil that I'd quickly recommend over the Potter books; Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy immediately comes to mind. I'd have to say, though, that Pullman's books might very well not have gotten published if the Potter books hadn't made publishers more willing to have a look at such fare.
But I agree with the above statement as it applies to ANY one text, not just the Potter books. You've probably noticed this in some of the HoL threads, but it seems appropriate to raise it here: in my early days there, it'd frustrate me a bit to read posts by people who talk about HoL as though it had sprung ex nihilo or something. Not that HoL is a bad novel; just that that perspective seems a rather stunted way to think about a book--especially one so clearly indebted to other books.
Sorry. I guess I'm miffed that I've not seen a huge spike in Moby-Dick's readership among the Forum members.
There's always the risk that reading bad writing will lead readers to buy more bad writing. But then again, Paul Bowles and Ray Bradbury aren't all that distant from Dan Brown on the bookshelves. For the reader who doesn't treat bookstores like convenience stores, maybe, just maybe . . .
Maybe indeed.
You know, ever since I read the threads about Moby Dick, I've tried finding it here in my country. And like all good things I can't find it anywhere.
I felt the same way about Harry Potter after reading the first one. It did nothing for me. I remember how entranced I was by A Wrinkle in Time while I was young, and Harry Potter didn't feel nearly that magical.
Then, someone convinced me to keep reading. I think I read books 2-4 in three weeks. It turns out the books get better and better as you keep going. I'm not sure the themes ever become so classic that the books will eventually rank up there with LOTR or anything, but her writing becomes better with each book, and the characters gain more depth. The villians (and could-be villians) also become much more deliciously evil.
Thanks.
Perhaps one day when I finally finish the books on my continually growing list of to-read, I shall find enough courage and/or boredom in my heart to pick Potter up and give it one more try.
The great thing then would be knowing how the story goes (because of spoilers I already know who dies in book 6) and concentrating on how well she tells it.
I mean, a good story is well and good, but it needs to be told well too. This is the very reason why I like Stephen King's work--especially his Dark Tower books.
You know Stephen King thinks the Potter books (and especially Rowling's writing) are great. See the stuff he's written in Entertainment Weekly about it.
I'll check his articles out. But he also thinks HoL is a strange house story. (You can't use the font tag in comments and that's why house isn't in blue.)
Post a Comment
<< Home