What makes a bestseller? - Page 3 - WritingForums.com - Writing Forums, Writing Challenges, Critiques and Help for Writers

SeattleCPA · 05-18-2007, 02:13 PM

Er, not to start a donnybrook, but I think JK's writing is pretty poor. Very unimaginative. Recycled. And poorly edited (which is probably because it wasn't edited).

I get so tired hearing her describe some character as "unctous" or "imperious"..

Yes, I have read (suffered) through all of her books. The price I pay for being a dad who likes to do read-alouds with his daughters.

Foolishly, confidently, I predict that her books won't be all that popular a few decades from now. No "Chronicles of Narnia" type situation for her.

BTW, I think movies made from the books are really good. (Also, I think, as much as it pains me to say it, that the movie recently made from C.S. Lewis's Lion, Witch and Wardrobe was not that good.)

Jolly McJollyson · 05-18-2007, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP Wagner

lol well that's subject to opinion, ( and personally i find anyone who doesnt appreciate the harry potter series as very short sightet (or just hasnt had the patience to read it all) but opinion or not, she is the second richest woman in teh world. from best sellers. end point.

I've read them all. I find them nice, escapist junk books. But she is no literary genius.

JP Wagner · 05-18-2007, 05:46 PM

Hehe, people often get lost in the fantasy world and fantasy elements of magic when reading harry potter. they fail to notice how many real life problems concerning teenagers she really describes in full detail with truth. people, especially adults also fail to realize how the whole series is a coming of age tale and kids can really grow up on them.

hate to disagree with you two, but I predict harry potter is going to end up being one of the few classics we see from our time that will last through the ages. Of course we won't know for another 20-30 years, but thats my opinion.

It's usually the same thing when dealing with science fiction and fantasy, alot of modern day scholars and literary obsessors can't see past the elements of fantasy and sci fi, or the secondary world to relate the issues to real life issues. kind of sad so many people have no imagination and can't read through the lines.

I will not go out on a limb and say Harry Potter is a work of literary genious, it is not, it was initially intended for children, but as the books go further on, they grow in age group as well, branching off easily into a story for teenagers. which is why the writing starts off simple and gets more complex as the series goes on. Again a perfect example why it is a coming of age story. You won't have any incredably in debth secret plot devices, it's all pretty up front. But just because its mostly up front doesnt make it untrue, doesnt make it ungenuine, and doesnt make it something that most young people can relate to in one regard or another, with fantasy elements on top of that.

I'm just happy when I started reading them I was young enough to appreciate them, and am still young enough to fully appreciate them, because unfortonatly sometimes when people reach a certain age they forget how much a series like harry potter really tells how it is. same way with most children's literature unfortonatly. Look what peter pan has been reduced to.

Jolly McJollyson · 05-18-2007, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP Wagner

Hehe, people often get lost in the fantasy world and fantasy elements of magic when reading harry potter. they fail to notice how many real life problems concerning teenagers she really describes in full detail with truth. people, especially adults also fail to realize how the whole series is a coming of age tale and kids can really grow up on them.

I read Samuel Beckett novels for fun. Believe me, I haven't missed the presence of those elements in Harry Potter. I still think her skills as a wordsmith are shit. Let's drop it.

Hodge · 05-18-2007, 06:22 PM

Eh, when sci-fi or fantasy writers really are good, the scholars don't "miss" it. Heinlein, Tolkien, Clarke, Asimov -- they're recognized as literary geniuses as well as excellent sci-fi and fantasy writers.

SeattleCPA · 05-18-2007, 06:53 PM

Hey, this is off subject, but isn't a weird to think that C.S. Lewis and Tolkien and, hmmm, can't remember, another 2 or 3 people too, used to go down to the pub, hoist a few beers, and read their latest works in progress?

I remember a quote from one of the so called Inklings reacting to Tolkien's reading one night. "Oh shit, not another f**king elf story."

OK. I love Tolkien. But that's funny.

P.S. I agree with Jolly. And if I understand, I think I agree with Hodge too.

JP Wagner · 05-18-2007, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleCPA

Hey, this is off subject, but isn't a weird to think that C.S. Lewis and Tolkien and, hmmm, can't remember, another 2 or 3 people too, used to go down to the pub, hoist a few beers, and read their latest works in progress?

I remember a quote from one of the so called Inkings reacting to Tolkien's reading one night. "Oh shit, not another f**king elf story."

OK. I love Tolkien. But that's funny.

P.S. I agree wit Jolly. And if I understand, I think I agree with Hodge too. JK just ain't that good. She's the Sydney Sheldon or Harold Robbins of her genre.

lol to my recollection Lewis was the only origional member who actually loved LOTR's right from the get go.
Also keep in mind half the time they were sharing their idea's they were smashed. ^.^

mammamaia · 05-18-2007, 09:06 PM

i have to agree with seattle...

sure, her books may become 'classics' in the sense of hype and number of copies sold, but never as 'timeless stories' or 'great writing' which is what makes a true 'classic'...

her writing is poor, but flashy, which appeals well enough to the kind of folks who buy her books, but does not impress literary critics... and her stories are not that far out of the ordinary, aside from the harry potter character, whose roots could be seen in mickey, as 'the sorceror's apprentice' as well as 'wart' in the animated 'sword in the stone' and a slew of other books and movies... so, her work's success is due more to hype than talent or content...

JP Wagner · 05-18-2007, 09:28 PM

well thats the real trick in this day and age isn't it? you're either going for the literary piece and usually don't do very well in the numbers sold, or your going for straight up commercial fiction and you do well but all the literature geeks bash your style (kno how much criticism dan brown has gotten? lol i dont think he's a great writer, but 46 million copies sold means he did something right.)

a literary critic can bash anyone, alot of the old timeless ones considered classics are bashed on a daily basis. rowling's writing is straight forward, whether thats considered poor or not really depends on what your judging it on. remember, they are CHILDRENS STORIES FIRST. they just happened to grow in market appeal to the adult aduience too in some cases. you cant judge it by the same standards you'd just a peice intended for a mature audience. it's in a different leage entirely. serious, try judging the little house as a literary classic. it wouldn't fit.

what impresses me more about JK Rowling is her content has so much depth. i kno the literary peoples are all about how it's presented, not content, but in a childrens story, the content she gives is impressive. then again, i've studied these books in depth for class, and explored all the possible meanings, so maybe they escape the average one time reader. but theres way more there than meets the eye.
However none of what im saying matters, because once editors and experts make up their minds on something it's case closed right? ^.^ (lol don't stone me, it was a joke!)
is she a shelly, or a steinbeck, or a hemingway? no.

but always remember....tolkein by literary standards today wouldn't have even gotten published, let alone considered a classic. so maybe it's possible that today's standards leave something to be desired? i think so at least. it's common ground that everyone knows newbies don't know everything, even if they think they do...but sometimes the professionals forget that they don't know everything either.

Hodge · 05-18-2007, 09:31 PM

No... Literary people are about content and depth. The Harry Potter series has little depth. Most commercial fiction has little depth.

JP Wagner · 05-18-2007, 09:35 PM

really hodge? most literary critics i kno tend to focus on how the words pour out on the page. ^.^

then again i guess defenition of depth is up in the air too. how many times has there been plenty of depth in a story that went ignored for years until after the author was dead? heh, not saying thats the case with rowling, but just saying' its happened when all the professionals get hung up and miss what's really there.
and yes, to some extent i think that happens with rowling. for reason's ive already stated. not nessicarily the fantasy element, but because they forget it's intended for kids, and therefor will deal with kid's social problems and kid's coming of age problems, and the problems will seem juvenille. doesnt make them any less real.

Rob · 05-19-2007, 04:26 AM

Whatever the quality of the writing, if you can understand and satisfy your target audience, that's a success. There are plenty of successful writers who wouldn't win the major literary prizes, and I don't imagine they care too much. Banville will probably never have thousands of people queueing outside bookstores for his latest novel, and JK Rowling will probably never win the Booker. I suspect they're both satisfied with their respective successes.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if they collaborated on something

Cheers,
Rob

Jolly McJollyson · 05-19-2007, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP Wagner

really hodge? most literary critics i kno tend to focus on how the words pour out on the page. ^.^

then again i guess defenition of depth is up in the air too. how many times has there been plenty of depth in a story that went ignored for years until after the author was dead? heh, not saying thats the case with rowling, but just saying' its happened when all the professionals get hung up and miss what's really there.
and yes, to some extent i think that happens with rowling. for reason's ive already stated. not nessicarily the fantasy element, but because they forget it's intended for kids, and therefor will deal with kid's social problems and kid's coming of age problems, and the problems will seem juvenille. doesnt make them any less real.

Right, that's why Catcher in the Rye is seens as juvenile. Because adults don't understand coming-of-age novels.

JP Wagner · 05-19-2007, 06:17 PM

lol catcher in the rye is also straight forward mainstream fiction with no sci fi/ fantasy elements in it. also, the main thing that impressed people at the time it came out was the languaged used because JD Salinger dared to be more truthful about language than most writers at the time. Sides, ive heard catcher have its fair share of bashing my literary critics too.

mammamaia · 05-19-2007, 07:29 PM

'catcher' is a piece of teenage hormone-driven dreck, imo... i don't know of a single girl who liked it, when my kids had to read it for english class... i'm just glad salinger became a hermit and didn't write much else...