This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

JK Rowling went to Exeter...

Reply 20

The Boosh

17

your knowledge of rowling is unsettling, angelil!

Reply 21

Annie Hall

1

Excuse me for _not_ stalking the woman!

Yes, even though she studied French and Classics, she should donate her bajillions to the English dept. And that's that, damnit!

Reply 22

Angelil

19

haha, my knowledge of her is largely helped by wikipedia...

and yes, she should donate money to the uni. Lots. Then maybe they could afford to employ some decent admin staff :p:

Reply 23

angel_flo

10

Apparently J K Rowling based Diagon Alley on Gandy Street, the four houses of Hogwarts on the four houses of Duryard, and the toilets that Moaning Myrtle lives in are similar to some found in the Jesse halls in Duryard!

Reply 24

supercat

2

Oh I only knew about Gandy St/Diagon Alley, didn't know the other bits!

her

Graaargh. I hate Harry sodding Potter...am glad the series is over tbh.

Why d'you hate it?

barry trotter. that was an odd one

Reply 29

Angelil

19

leona

Why d'you hate it?

It's not as imaginative or as well-written as people make out, and there are far better authors who deserve the ridiculous levels of hype far more.

Reply 30

supercat

2

Alternatively, it brought reading to a generation that weren't so into it and made it 'cool' again.

And have you read them? They are actually very very imaginative and intricate, it's quite clear that they were all planned from the very beginning as everything links back and forth.

Yes she's not the greatest author in the world and they aren't brilliantly written but she's achieved a lot in my opinion.

She's no Roald Dahl.

I love Roald Dahl :love:

Reply 33

Kater Murr

OP

20

I really like Harry Potter. It's for kids, it's not supposed to be amazingly well-written. The important thing is that you actually care what happens to the characters. No other book has ever left me shaking and crying like some of those Hazza Potter books have...

Reply 34

Angelil

19

I don't mind if it gets kids into reading - i.e. if they read Potter, enjoy it and then go on to read better stuff. What I object to is the huge numbers of kids who read HP and go "OMGZZZZ its the best book evaaaaa" when they haven't actually read anything else. So if anything, the hype HP is given only makes kids more narrowminded in their reading choices, not less. I have read some and I wasn't really impressed. Since the example's already been given, Roald Dahl is far superior - it's just that for some reason he wasn't given the same level of hyperactive marketing as JK Rowling, which in my opinion is a crying shame.

Reply 35

leona

12

But Roald Dahl is an absolute classic, its not like he's going to be forgotten or replaced by Rowling.

And I'd have to disagree with the bit about her books not being much good, I think they are very well written, ok theyre not literary masterpieces but the imaginative element is very clever, the way everything fits and links together, and the fact that they manage to keep the readers attention for so long show that she is a talented writer. After all, there is a reason why so many people love the books!
Of course, its all just a matter of individual opinion really. Just wanted to put my two cents in :smile:

Reply 36

Kater Murr

OP

20

I don't mind if it gets kids into reading - i.e. if they read Potter, enjoy it and then go on to read better stuff. What I object to is the huge numbers of kids who read HP and go "OMGZZZZ its the best book evaaaaa" when they haven't actually read anything else. So if anything, the hype HP is given only makes kids more narrowminded in their reading choices, not less. I have read some and I wasn't really impressed. Since the example's already been given, Roald Dahl is far superior - it's just that for some reason he wasn't given the same level of hyperactive marketing as JK Rowling, which in my opinion is a crying shame.

It doesn't annoy - or affect me - that some kids say 'OMGZZZZ THIS IS THE BEST BOOK EVVVAAA' >ahem<; but, to be fair - it's probably the book that's affected me the most emotionally, ever. And I cry at a lot of books. (Admittedly I feel more stupid crying and shaking at Dumbledore's death than at the end of Lolita. Nevertheless...)

And as far as Roald Dahl goes - one of the reasons HP is so popular is that it's a series. After reading The Twits (which I read over and over as a wee one), one doesn't suddenly feel an immense NEED to read Fantastic Mr. Fox, whereas with HP, we must know what happens. This, I think, is key to it's popularity. As the above poster says, it just fits in together so cleverly.

Reply 37

Angelil

19

Obviously I don't know you, and nor am I one of these people who reacts as emotionally deeply as that to books, but I'd be inclined to say that the hype surrounding HP contributes to your emotional reaction. You may enjoy the books, but your enjoyment/passion for them is only intensified by the hyperbole as shops use their business sense to capitalise on people's emotions (by holding midnight parties etc etc), thus deepening them. Personally I don't think it's really healthy to react so emotionally to books so regularly (only one book has ever made me shed a tear, and that was "Paula" by Isabel Allende, for the record).

Anyway, this is hardly on topic now, is it? :p:

Reply 38

leona

12

Course it is, its on Harry Potter, kinda! :p:

Out of interest, why do you think its unhealthy to react emotionally to books regularly?

Reply 39

Angelil

19

Because perhaps real life events are more deserving of such deep emotional reactions. It's fine to react that way to books/films once in a while, but how would it not completely wreck you if you reacted that way all the time?

JK Rowling went to Exeter...

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you