I really don't understand how she is a great "literature" writer.

Her books have been incredibly successful, but this is not due to her writing prowess, she is telling a good story, but not particualarly well.

Literature is supposed to change the way people see things, live their lives or just affect their mentality. JK Rowling does none of these things, she is an excuse of a writer, and the fact that she welcomes these titles are an insult to true writers.

She is a commercial writer. Any literature academic has already described her as thus, and using her clumsy tact, she has released the "fact" that Dumbledore is gay. She thinks that by making up some story about what ehr work means she can be classed as an author that changed peoples views on homosexuality etc. This is a desperate act from a woman who has realised that to the average reader she is a great writer, but to anyone with any knowledge on literature, she is just a commercial, kids author. If anything it has put a nail in her coffin, no literary writer just releases information about what they were saying, they leave it open to reader interperetation.

I have had enough of people saying Harry Potter is literature, and enough of people saying she is a great writer - (if by great writer they mean someone who ahs changed peoples lives, challenged society, made a difference other than a bedtime story.

JK rowling is a bad writer!

She writes great trash! ;)

exactly, I've had enough of people on this forum, in the world being smitten with her shit.

exactly, I've had enough of people on this forum, in the world being smitten with her shit.

Shit is shit but she writes trash, a little different than shit though because it doesn't smell as bad. ;)

How is what she wrote any different than The Iliad or The Odyssey? Its great storytelling! Stories unite people, give them common ground.
And all writer's who want to eat and make a living, are commercial writers. Otherwise they can write in their diary.

the smell is debatable tbh

Sorry let me replace commercial with sell out.
People Like JD Salinger, that wrote with purpose to show the reader things about society and life, not just to make the reader want to turn the next page.

the only positive of harry potter is that it encourages young reading,

Sure, it's a guilty pleasure, like Clancy, Crichton, or King, so what. It captivated many young people who had previously not been interested in reading. She can say what she likes about her fictional characters.

I'm not saying her writins is having a negative effect on anyone, I'm arguing with the statement that she is a "great "literature" writer of our time"

Yeah, I read perhaps the first two books and lost interest, they are all the same.

She made children read real books again.

That would classify her as the ultimate writer.

She made children read real books again.

That would classify her as the ultimate writer.

Children have been reading books before SHE came along. It is just thay she

got all the hype and the other writers didn't.

More writers than Rowling have made kids read books.

Real books? If you eman literature I'm going to stuff your trousers with a nail bomb

Children have been reading books before SHE came along. It is just thay she

got all the hype and the other writers didn't.

No, it has been shown that she actually made a tremendous amount of children read proper books again.

This does not make her a LITERATURE writer.

L-i-t-e-r-a-t-u-r-e

No, it has been shown that she actually made a tremendous amount of children read proper books again.

Did she buy them books? Did she teach them to read? No, they already

knew how to read before they ever bought her books because they were

taught how to read other children's books before she was even known all

that well. If kids couldn't read and then by some miracle they were made to

read with only her books then that would be different.

knowing how to read doesn't mean you read books.

Did she buy them books? Did she teach them to read? No, they already

knew how to read before they ever bought her books because they were

taught how to read other children's books before she was even known all

that well. If kids couldn't read and then by some miracle they were made to

read with only her books then that would be different.

Her first book was the first book my little brother read completely through all by himself. Then he spent his own allowance to get the rest of them. Then he started reading other things too.

Before that, he didn't care too much about reading.

he didn't care too much about reading.

So that means that he read other things BEFORE reading her work. That's all

I wanted to get across.

I'm confused. Who has called her a great writer? And who thinks her work is literature?

So that means that he read other things BEFORE reading her work. That's all

I wanted to get across.

actually he didn't. Harry potter was the first thing he really read according to the post.

Sorry let me replace commercial with sell out.
People Like JD Salinger, that wrote with purpose to show the reader things about society and life, not just to make the reader want to turn the next page.

the only positive of harry potter is that it encourages young reading,

j.d Salinger had a purpose beyond annoying the hell out of people who had to read that shit for high school English?

Rowling doesn't claim to be great literature any more than Steven KIng does. But she is engaging and readable, and the written word has purpose beyond high art. I mean, hey I love Godard's films, but sometimes I want to see something with aliens and explosions and shirtless men.

And then there are writers like William Gibson, who are incredibly talented at their craft but still not within the realm of high literature. How do you class something like that?

What happened to our little banter that we had, the twit thingy?

What happened to our little banter that we had, the twit thingy?

I was afraid you were too into the abuse.

:spank:

She fully embodies what is happening to modern authors today. Authors spew dozens of books nowadays and it is considered a norm. I strongly doubt that one can write dozens of novels and be considered a great writer. It is true, there are prolific authors in the history of literature that are truly great, but there are very few of them. Mostly, people who spew novels so frequently simply do not give themselves enough time to think through their writing and are not even fulfilling their own potential, however tiny that potential may be. Rowling is gross.

I really don't understand how she is a great "literature" writer.

Her books have been incredibly successful, but this is not due to her writing prowess, she is telling a good story, but not particualarly well.

Literature is supposed to change the way people see things, live their lives or just affect their mentality. JK Rowling does none of these things, she is an excuse of a writer, and the fact that she welcomes these titles are an insult to true writers.

She is a commercial writer. Any literature academic has already described her as thus, and using her clumsy tact, she has released the "fact" that Dumbledore is gay. She thinks that by making up some story about what ehr work means she can be classed as an author that changed peoples views on homosexuality etc. This is a desperate act from a woman who has realised that to the average reader she is a great writer, but to anyone with any knowledge on literature, she is just a commercial, kids author. If anything it has put a nail in her coffin, no literary writer just releases information about what they were saying, they leave it open to reader interperetation.

I have had enough of people saying Harry Potter is literature, and enough of people saying she is a great writer - (if by great writer they mean someone who ahs changed peoples lives, challenged society, made a difference other than a bedtime story.
JK rowling is a bad writer!


Harry Potter books changed my sons oputlook on life! before he read the books he was withdrawn and miserable all the time, but after her read them he was out going happy and a pleasure to be with

errrr? ok, i was more getting at challening society than making kiddies squeal in delight

errrr? ok, i was more getting at challening society than making kiddies squeal in delight

argh right then in that aspect your quite right, sorry about the misunderstanding

*hug*

The first three were good. The last four were shit.

what was the last fictional book written that challenged society?

mariela griffor?

poetry???

no her short story collection

I don't think Rowling is a particularly good writer either. However her novels have led to millions of children putting down their video games and actually reading – without being forced. Have many other authors had such an impact on literacy rates?

It may not be great literature but I think it is an amazing achievement.

Shaman, did her books do that because they were 'good', or because they were well marketed? Because I remember the first Harry Potter book being out a long time before it became popular. It was only when it got some publicity that it became a craze.

I mean, shit. Pokemon was a crazy around the world with children. Are you going to argue that Pokemon is high quality anime? Pfft.

Shaman, did her books do that because they were 'good', or because they were well marketed? Because I remember the first Harry Potter book being out a long time before it became popular. It was only when it got some publicity that it became a craze. I mean, shit. Pokemon was a crazy around the world with children. Are you going to argue that Pokemon is high quality anime? Pfft.If you read my post you will see that I don't think Rowling is "high quality". So your analogy is not valid.

I doubt her success can be completely put down to clever marketing but sure it's possible. My point was that the success of these books is a very positive thing.

Why? Because it got children away from the TV/Computer? Movies/series/games aren't artistic?

I have never thought as Rowling as a great literature writer. She was actually paid to continue writing the Harry Potter series. If you've ever compared a piece of literature to a Harry Potter book, you will see that one is for kids and adolescents, while the other (Grapes of Wrath for example) is a nobel Prize winning book. Generally, literature is not often read by kiddies.:D

Why? Because it got children away from the TV/Computer? Movies/series/games aren't artistic?Because it leads to children reading.

Is Mark Twain great literature?

personaly i think it is to early to make a good judgement on this great lit stays popular over time

All right, I'll start responding to the question of what makes great literature.

Great literature is what becomes a classic. It's something that is timeless despite portraying certain events or aspects of life that could only exist in a particular year. As I look back to what we consider classical literature, it all taps into some truths about human nature to which we all can relate. (Most of) those books are fun to read from start to finish. They have a well-developed, interesting plot, interesting characters, and eloquence. Each book that we consider a classic also expresses some great idea that is new and true. Each classic is unique.

There have been gay characters in literature among all sorts of characters that carried some taboo. J. K. Rowling does nothing of the sort though, and her little statement that one of her characters happens to be gay is... okay, sensational today, but it will be forgotten tomorrow. Harry Potter is not timeless, certainly not in the sea of blurtings that other authors spew out with the same speed as Rowling.

Another thing I hate about modern books is that if one sells well there must be a sequel. Ugh.

what was the last fictional book written that challenged society?

Sartre, Vonnegut, Salinger, Ursula Le Guin, William Gibson....

Someone else help me out here with a list of modern classics.

shaman:

Because it leads to children reading.


So? They are still sitting in one place, not getting any exercise. And who says that a movie/computer game isn't as intellectually stimulating as a book? Have you ever seen anyone try to win a game of Starcraft against a South Korean? Talk about intellectually stimulating!

Sartre, Vonnegut, Salinger, Ursula Le Guin, William Gibson....

Someone else help me out here with a list of modern classics.

OK, good list. How has each one challenged society?

So? They are still sitting in one place, not getting any exercise. And who says that a movie/computer game isn't as intellectually stimulating as a book? Have you ever seen anyone try to win a game of Starcraft against a South Korean? Talk about intellectually stimulating!Yeah kids should all just play computer games. Sure the literacy rates will go down and within a couple of generations adults wont read much either but if the Zerg ever attack we will have millions of potential generals!

Yeah kids should all just play computer games. Sure the literacy rates will go down and within a couple of generations adults wont read much either but if the Zerg ever attack we will have millions of potential generals!

Hey, war may be fought via starcraft style in the future. It's a lot less bloody and much more civilized.

The loser forks over lots of virtual moolah.

OK, good list. How has each one challenged society?

They challenged society by observing it and bringing our attention to critical aspects that were overlooked. The things we overlook are usually the things we don't like to admit; therefore, it is a challenge.

Can you seriously put Rowling into that list? I can not. Not even after she brought one of her characters out of the closet.

and what about accepting muggles and half bloods? How the one wanting purity was evil?