This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

JK Rowling - an average writer, that had one good idea, and got lucky?

junoreacter

Do you think she has genuine literal prowess? Or was the Harry Potter series just a lucky spark?
If you ask me, by plot, I think Pullman far outweighs her

I think most serious people in literature agree that she does not have very good literary skills. Just look at book 5. All my English lecturers hate her, part jealously but mostly irritation. But then, genius is only 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration (I can't remember who said that) and she did manage to write seven successful books so even though I think she is a crappy writer with a good idea, she's pulled the whole operation off right?

If Pullman had written HP I think those books may have been made out of pure gold in terms of literary worth. I often wish he did. I wish anybody but JK did. I think the only character in the series with any development is draco malfoy. The others stayed exactly the same.

So JK Rowling got lucky. Either that or she sold her soul :eek:

.

Reply 41

harr

15

I don't get this "good idea" thing, it's not as if wizarding schools, dark wizards and chosen ones haven't been done before. It's not common that all three are combined, but it happens. It's how she wrote the stories that was important -- I don't mean her sentence structure and vocabulary, nor her use of plot devices and metaphor, but how she wrote it in a more holistic sense.

Reply 42

jinglepupskye

14

Dijobla

I think most serious people in literature agree that she does not have very good literary skills. Just look at book 5. All my English lecturers hate her, part jealously but mostly irritation. But then, genius is only 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration (I can't remember who said that) and she did manage to write seven successful books so even though I think she is a crappy writer with a good idea, she's pulled the whole operation off right?

If Pullman had written HP I think those books may have been made out of pure gold in terms of literary worth. I often wish he did. I wish anybody but JK did. I think the only character in the series with any development is draco malfoy. The others stayed exactly the same.

So JK Rowling got lucky. Either that or she sold her soul :eek:

.

I don't agree about the lack of character development, although it is true of some of the characters, especially Ron and Hermione who basically remain the same at 17 as they were at 11.

But Dudley certainly showed some character development, expecially in book 7 and Neville progressed amazingly during the final three books. The most important character was Snape who changed from a one dimensional hate character to someone whom I actually cried over in the final book when I thought about his heroism in dealing with Voldemort and his struggle to overcome his dislike for for Harry and his father and his enduring love for Lily.
That is character development.

For me, the hero of the books is, and always will be, Severus Snape and Harry is just incidental.

As for Pullman, I found his first book in TDM totally tedious and he didn't really get going until later in the second and third books. And LOTR left me completely stone cold. If you want to talk about tedious passages that you just skim over, then the battle scenes in book 2 would be well up on the top of the list for me.

Reply 43

Phantom Phoenix

13

She writes reasonably and engagingly, but I don't think I've ever seen an original idea in there. Perfect children's writer, in other words.

Reply 44

username158564

17

Red_Sky

Why so? I have read quite a lot of literature, and love most of it. But there is something about LOTR that drives me stark raving bonkers! I tried, I failed, I hate to admit that I couldn't even read more than a few pages! :no:

I tried reading it, finished the first chapter, then stopped. I just couldn't carry on.

Reply 45

SarahhhD

8

chernij

I tried reading it, finished the first chapter, then stopped. I just couldn't carry on.

Is it that mind Numbingly boring?
I tried to read it a few years ago, and couldn't get past the first...40? pages.

Reply 46

LiberiFatali

14

Belle-x

She got lucky. I hate Harry Potter and I bet tons of people only like it cos they think they have to.

******. While I recognize that a lot of people may dislike the series for genuine reasons, I am willing to bet that a lot more people hate the series because it's "mainstream" and therefore not a choice for connoisseurs (read: crap).

I've read a lot, and while Harry Potter isn't exactly the best thing I have read, some of the stick it gets hardly seems justified.

Reply 47

username158564

17

SarahhhD

Is it that mind Numbingly boring?
I tried to read it a few years ago, and couldn't get past the first...40? pages.

It is to me, anyway. 40 pages... ah well you beat me :p:

How come you stopped reading it after that amount of pages?

Reply 48

TeamBlueGravy

12

SarahhhD

Is it that mind Numbingly boring?
I tried to read it a few years ago, and couldn't get past the first...40? pages.

Weather the storm it gets ohh so better (the later books though 3 onwards)

Reply 49

SarahhhD

8

chernij

It is to me, anyway. 40 pages... ah well you beat me :p:

How come you stopped reading it after that amount of pages?

I was reading like a page a night.
It was so boring it was unbelievable, I can tell I'm enjoying something when I actually can't put the book down.

Reply 50

DaveJ

I thought she was good until Deathly Hallows. Why she wrote over half the book about the most dull camping trip ever, I'll never work out.

Reply 51

Zerodos

15

Brilliant books. The whole story line in general was lucky as she admite when saying it just came to her but it has many sub plots of which she developed. She deserves her success

Reply 52

username158564

17

SarahhhD

I was reading like a page a night.
It was so boring it was unbelievable, I can tell I'm enjoying something when I actually can't put the book down.

A page a night?! You mean you carried on reading it for over a month?! Wow!
:ditto:

to the second comment. I could soooo easily put it down. So easily that it got put down back into my cupboard.

Reply 53

MathsStudent

1

Valkyrja

Do you know what? I think a lot of you are missing the point of JK Rowlings writing.

What she did was make literature accessible to people again, the billions of people who have bought her books come from all levels of society. Not since Enid Blyton has an author united so many people and encouraged reading in those who are not actively encouraged to read at home. I had my own library of books growing up, I was not rich by any stretch of the imagination, but I loved books and stories, unfortunately I have to say I am the exception to the rule, growing up in working class wales there were definitely a lot of people at my school who had never read a book at home even at the age of 16. In my opinion although JK rowling is not an amazing 'writer' in the technical snobbery sense, she is a fantastic story teller....and I would rather read a 'badly' written fantastic story than an excellently constructed literary masterpiece that wasn't too wonderful on the story telling front.

I completely agree with this

I mean just look at Henry James and I am about to offend tonnes when I say that Pride and Prejudice has little substance...

Reply 54

diamonddust

15

SarahhhD

She got lucky, It was the draw of magic, but I still love the books.
Twilight is fantastic aswell. :smile:

Don't talk about Twilight to me! :p:

I loved it and then I read the other 3 and hated them!
I think JK Rowling got where she has by having an amazing imagination. I don't think her style is amazing but her idea was brilliant and she brought her characters alive. I was rooting for Voldy in Deathly Hallows though, Harry's way too annoying to exist (well...not exist... but yeah!) actually quite like Bella from Twilight! I hate stupid, whiny, undeveloped characters...(bella) but that's a whole other thread.

Reply 55

SomeNextPirate

11

Children don't want to read intricate and complicated narratives. She accomplished what she set out to do (and a lot more seeing as lots of adults also enjoyed the books), provide enjoyable books for children :rolleyes:

There truly are a lot of bitter people...

Reply 56

Petit chou

15

She isn't the best writer but her imagination more than makkes up for that. She created an entire world and seriously thought through the entire plot vigorously and if you read the books from the beginning you'll see there are alot of linksand hints to what happens in later books.

Reply 57

Marsha2112

15

I don't think so. I've read 100s of books and her writing style just has something about it - no, it's not all clever and pretentious like Pullman (whose books I thought were good but half of the 'scenery description' was pointless and confusing) but I think that's why it's good, she writes so simply and the story just captivates people.
I don't think luck can bring you over 1 billion dollars from 7 books...

Reply 58

Chumbaniya

17

I don't think it's luck. If you judge by the books by any sort of serious literary standards they're fairly poor, but I think it's difficult to deny that Rowling has a talent for writing a real page turner. The characters are simple and undynamic, the plot is almost always heavy handed - especially in the way that it is constantly and obviously contriving the events of a whole world to fit around a protagonist who would otherwise be wholly uninteresting - and any depth to the narrative and the themes explored within is essentially non-existent. And yet I and a great many others who read enough to be able to recognise this were unable to put the books down after starting.

Reply 59

Danny the Geezer

21

Pullman outweighs her IMO.

JK Rowling - an average writer, that had one good idea, and got lucky?

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you