/lit/ - Literature

>>9568732
Laurie, posting here won't boost your sales, especially if you write ridiculous things like the idea of someone reading one of your books every reading *another* of your books.

>>9285925
-Variety June 2013 listed the values of Disney franchises, including Winnie the Pooh showing that only the Star Wars and James Bond films make more and discussing general value
-Court findings from the 2003 copyright suit and appeals confirm the annual income of Pooh franchise
-Forbes in September 2010 and again in August of 2015 confirmed the value of the Harry Potter franchise
-Fortune discussed the total value of Harry Potter in December 2015 also confirmed the Harry potter franchise value
[I tried posting links different ways but it was always blocked as spam. Sorry]

>>9285934
You're missing the real point.
Winnie the Pooh is *massively* successful - in print continuously for 90 years; 16 full-length movies; ten hour long films; 4 TV series with a combined 16 seasons; over a dozen high-selling video games; dozens of high-selling books for infants, children, and YA.
It is incredibly, wildly successful and popular.
>here is the point
Ever hear anyone claim Winnie the Pooh is 'relevant' to literature? 'Important' writing? Ever hear someone talking about how they are going to study Milne to replicate his vast literary success?
Nope.
The point is - Harry Potter is successful, sure, it it was never, ever 'relevant'.
Look at it another way
All time sales of Huckleberry Finn?
>20 million copies
All time sales of Flowers in the Attic?
>40 million copies
Is Flowers in the Attic twice as 'relevant' to literature as Huckleberry Finn?

so many naive comments here

>>3247766
>>Atlas shrugged

> "It's fantasy! People gather teams of skilled individuals and go on adventures! What else do you expect?"