/lit/ - Literature

>>16414225
Yes. The Hunger Games already did it. There will be a nee Hunger Games if there isn't already.

>>16414248
The Hunger Games was garbage though, save the first book maybe.

>>16414248
They didn't build multiple amusement parks based on the Hunger Games though.

>>16414225
It will probably happen again, but it will probably be years from now.

I don't think so. Internet changed society too much for that.
The traditional fiction release format is obsolete. Young people who like to read prefer getting a smaller chunk of a story on a regular basis instead of waiting a few years for a new book. These successful stories might be compiled into traditional books or adapted into movies, but the ephemeral nature of mass media trends means that we'll probably never see a long lasting cultural spectacle like Harry Potter again.

>>16414248
the first Hunger Games has sold 28million copies, the first Harry Potter has sold 120million. The whole Hunger Games series have sold 65million whereas HP is over 500million

>>16414274
>the ephemeral nature of mass media trends means that we'll probably never see a long lasting cultural spectacle like Harry Potter again.
I think you're exaggerating, just look at A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones. Maybe it's not as big, but it certainly enjoyed considerable longevity.

>>16414225
my diary desu

>>16414225
As much as /lit/ likes to hate it, there deff was something special about it. I read it once through as a tween and I still remember all the characters, and the scenes, and the plot. It was my gateway to reading too.

>>16414225
Yes, but I feel like it won't be fantasy.

>>16414342
And the last two seasons on HBO killed the entire fandom. HP still wins.

Nope, from here on out, reading will fade out completely, and reading will instead evolve to support learning or entertaining images and everything inbetween. But sitting with a fucking book is dead, and actually a less effective way of learning (or entertaining) than anything else. Readings edge though will always be that it is your imagination creating the story and not breast fed into you. But still, it's a dead concept.

>>16414225
Yes. just like how people would have talked about the possibility of some now forgotten book series ever being eclipsed.

>>16414225
I hope not. Anything that big just promotes globalism.

>>16414260
The first book, despite its present-tense, first-person point of view, is decent.

>>16414225
>Will there ever be a book series as popular again as Harry Potter?
Probably, but not in the near future and never in societies that don't restrict the usage of devices with displays.
Permanent access to smartphones and the internet for children (and adults) wrecks their attention spans. Even reading a book for more than 20 pages or 20minutes, whatever happens earlier, is apparently difficult. Every second day there is a new thread about that subject here, where someone is complaining about having his brain fried by too much constant stimulation, making reading difficult. That isn't just a problem in first world countries, you can find smartphones everywhere and see people in their bullshit job spending time with them if their job allows it, like in shops with few visitors.
I do think that many people bought books of A Game of Thrones when the series was popular and most them haven't read it and are never going to read it.
Obviously you can meet people who surf the internet and still read books but most people I know in my millennial peer group switched from novels to series and movies if they want to have good entertainment in 2-3h. All of them used to read a lot as a kid.
I'm surprised that the middle class families in my soulless suburbia who are sending their kids to Montessori and Waldorf schools aren't restricting smartphones completely - they give it to them for 1 or 2h a day and the kids go wild.
There is another thing why Harry Potter would have it harder today: It wasn't that easy to have access to good movies and series as a kid. A kid didn't go to a video store to rent a VHS or DVD, No one went to Imdb to look for the best movies. People didn't stream movies and downloading one via filesharing (kaZaa for example) wasn't the norm. There were maybe one or two interesting movies that were on Friday, Saturday or Sunday evening and that's it. There were many tv shows for kids but somehow they weren't more interesting than reading books for many kids. Usually the kids did both, read and watch tv and it wasn't really a conflict in interests.

>>16414263
were they built due to the books popularity or the movies popularity though?

>>16414225
fifty shades series already beat it

>>16414274
>Young people who like to read prefer getting a smaller chunk of a story on a regular basis instead of waiting a few years for a new book.
Lot of stuff we read today in book format first came out chapter by chapter in some newspaper, so it's not exactly something unique for this generation.
The problem is that internet is more and more pushing newspaper into being relic of the past, while websites that should fill that spot of publishing stories are either fanfiction sites with zero quality control or are not exactly that well-known among normies.

>>16414225
As popular as Harry Potter? Probably not for a long time

But theres been huge book series since then Hunger Games, 50 Shades, A Song of Ice And Fire are all really big

>>16414225

I know that /lit/ doesn't like Rowling's Harry Potter novels, but what did you guys think about Troubled Blood?

>>16414310

Yeah, but Harry Potter has made a whole generation of people get into witchcraft and sorcery and some of them have even played quidditch in some form or another. How many people have taken up hunting or trapping animals for food or gladiatorial-like sports as depicted in The Hunger Games?

>>16415494

https://archive.vn/grzVz
J.K. Rowling Book Burning Videos Are Spreading Like Wildfire Across TikTok

People are now burning her novels because of her comments on transpeople. At least her Harry Potter books are still in the top 20 on Amazon or whatever website has the list of popular books.

>>16416866
The books are just as famous as the movies

>>16414263
There is a joke in there somewhere about [Insert Country Here] but god damn is it eluding me right now.

>>16414945

based

>>16414225
Harry Potter is dead

>>16417941
>>16419152
Publishers are happy as fuck I bet.
Also, maybe finally, FINALLY, those faggots stop referencing to HP books for every little thing. Next is Star Wars, which already almost dead.

>>16417825
Pretty sure asoiaf is older than harry potter

>>16419152
Rowling didn't even need to spend money on advertising when she has these useful apes

>>16417941
>Yeah, but
you might have misread my post

>>16414979
I've been rereading it and it's a blast. I know every story beat and I'm still having tons of fun reading it.