/lit/ - Literature

because if you read harry potter as a child you are being trained to later read stephen king

>>6799658
>Umbridge
Literally who?

>tfw I will never do lines of coke with Stephen in the bathroom of a NYC bar

>>6799674

>>6799674
Villain introduced in the 5th Harry Potter book. Lady who acts all sweet and innocent, but is really twisted beneath her excessively sweet exterior; actually the best villain in the entire series, and arguably the most memorable character.

>>6799674
Basically Hitler in a pink cardigan

I have seen the future of Literature, her name is J. K. Rowling.

But Voldemort was absolute trash as a villain, and the best HP book (3) was the one where the villain wasn't a villain at all.

>>6801143
He was talking about Umbridge. Volemort is shit tier, absolute crap, but Umbridge is alright.

Does it matter whether he likes it or not? Why are you giving weight to his opinion as if he was a decent author and not just a producer of genre fiction?
>>6799663
Also this.

>>6801143
>time travel fag detected.

>>6799727
I don't remember her

>>6801761
3 was the best. Had the best mystery, and the best twist. It wasn't overly long like 4-7 were.

>>6799658
/trash/ general thread?

>caring what shitty pulp authors think of shitty YA authors
gr8 thread m8 for the next one make sure to tell me what GRRM thinks of John Green

>>6801786
Just as the voice of Nolan matters in film, regardless of how mediocre he is, so does King in literature. When you are respected by critics and audiences alike, you will have an impact on the entire medium.

>>6801786
>George R R Martin.
What is actually wrong with him? I thought his books were fine.

>>6801801
He's popular, so he's cool to hate on.

>>6801810
Ah.

>>6801786
>caring what shitty pulp authors think of shitty YA authors

> YA authors

it's time to stop this "harry potter is YA" crap

Harry potter is written at the age level of kids 7-11 at best. Mostly towards 7-8. YA is work aimed towards 13+ ages. This would include stuff like To Kill a Mockingbird, Fahrenheit 451, 1984, Brave New World, etc. Harry Potter is NOT YA and when you promote it as such you endorse the idea that it's okay for teenagers to read that shit. Call it children's literature, or rather Children's pulp, because it's hardly above the level of Goosebumps.

I only do this because my AP Lit teacher in high school told us that Harry Potter 6-7 really should be accepted on the AP Lit essay portion because it has "dark themes" and everyone in class agreed

>>6801801
nice b8 m8

>>6801792
Nolan doesn't make film, he makes movies for plebs. King doesn't write literature, he writes pulp trash for plebs

>>6801824
He makes movies for nomies, arguably cinema. Definitely doesn't make films though.

>>6801824
>nice b8 m8
I was hoping for an actual answer but nice maymay, dude.

>>6801833
go back to reddit you fucking disgusting pleb

>>6801840
>reddit
>pleb
>>>/tv/

>>6801840
>>6801824
>he unironically uses the word pleb

>>6801843
>Ironically doing anything.
Fuck off.

>>6801854
>not understanding that irony is the first step to post-irony

>>6801857
Is that anything more than a fancy of saying you're a member of the hipster elite?

>>6801863
>is on /lit/
>doesn't understand post-irony

Go watch Port of Call New Orleans. You'll get it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-irony

>>6801843
>not using the word pleb unironically to describe actual plebs
>he isn't an elitist

>>6801143
The only good thing about Voldemort was the revelation that he was a lich.

>>6804106
>>6801143
Why was the main villain of this overly long book series by far the worst villain of the series?

Umbridge is an excellent villain though.

I want reddit to leave

>>6799658
Waning stars like to anoint waxing stars to bolster their own egos and stay relevant.

"SHE'S JUST AS AWESOME AS I AM!"

>>6799679
>tfw I will never do lines of coke in a NYC bar bathroom again

>Harry, did I ever tell you about my sister, Ariana? she was raped into insanity by a bunch of filthy muggles, so after she died I planned with a dark lord to subjugate all muggles and rule the world. She was a good friend.

Is there an explanation for her evilness a la Riddle's childhood? Or is she just a symptom of a cancerous and bungling gov't that Rowling satirizes.
The description of her office with the sickeningly cute kittens playing about was good.

>>6799727
I literally don't remember her, but that sounds like some cancer that would be in those books

I just remember a 3 headed dog in the first one, then the rest bleed together, and i remember the ending being shit

>>6804143
>wolf in sheeps clothing
>the oldest trope in its most comical form a cunt who wears pink granny sweaters
>excellent

teachers just dont understand us kids

harry potter gets me

simply epic

>>6804547
It was that overly sweet shit eating grin that she had that made her so wonderfully evil. That feeling of hopelessness as even though the other teachers despised her, she always won at the end until she was gangraped by centaurs.

>>6804567
I'm just curious.

Who else would you describe as an "excellent" or "wonderfully evil" antagonist?

>there are people on /lit/ who have read Harry Potter books

>>6801764
>>6804520

Umbridge is actually a really good character, especially if you read the book when you're a kid. She's the apotheosis of every adult who claims, and really seems to belive, that they are acting in your best interest when in reality they're being petty and cruel.

>>6805656
This.

Absolutely disgusting.

>>6805656

I work with a guy who has read the Harry Potter series eleven times. It was a few years ago he told me that, so that number might now be higher.

>>6805693
I listen to them every couple years, the Stephen Fry audiobooks are real comfy. I drive 50+ hours a week for work though, so I go through a lot of audiobooks.

>>6805656
If they were kids when they read them that's okay, as long as they're only talking about memories of reading them as a kid. Kid's books (and YA) have their place, but continuing to read them past that point is just sad.

>>6805713
Reading the books you loved as a kid can be a nice nostalgia trip, same with watching the films you loved as a kid.

>>6805673
>hating something without experiencing it
>being this much of a mindless reactionary

>>6805717
I ain't ever read no single page of Twilight, but I don't need to to know that that shit is not cres.

>books are about stories and characters
This is why you are a pleb, Stephen.

>>6805717
>not part of the meme trilogy
>worth reading

>>6805741
Some are. Some aren't. Both are valid and important. Your point?

>>6805746
No, characters and stories are superfluous in good literature. In bad literature, like Stephen King and JK Rowling's body of work, you can care about stories, but in mature literature the story and characters are just a vessel for philosophy. Think of Homer, or Plato, or Dante, or Dostoevsky, or Joyce.

>>6801118

>>6805755
Some people read books to have fun. That's why GRRM is a best selling author.

>>6805764
fucking normies man

>>6805764
That doesn't make GRRM high literature, though.

>>6805771
good =/= high

>>6805818
They are exactly the same thing. Literature isn't created as entertainment.

>>6805729
Then the most you can ever say about it without being a pretentious faker is "Oh, I haven't read it."
I have read it, btw, and it's shit. But at least I know that.

>>6805729
>I ain't ever read a page of Twilight
You don't seem to be able to read by the way you write.

>>6805893
>a

And neither can you mate.

>>6805895
I guess I was giving you too much credit, American.

>>6799727
She also gets raped by centaurs in a childrens book. The protaganists just sort of watch it happen.

>>6804483
She's literaly the only non sympathetic major villain in the entire series (Some of the death eaters too, but they aren't important enough to matter), Even the Dursleys have a redemption arc. She just gets raped by fucking centaurs.

>>6801818
>Harry potter is written at the age level of kids 7-11 at best. Mostly towards 7-8.
Nigga what?
You don't have beloved characters getting murdered in fights in children's books.
The first 2 books were for children, but from the third one the target age has been gradually increasing.

>To Kill a Mockingbird, Fahrenheit 451, 1984, Brave New World, etc.
YA doesn't literally mean "for young adults". It actually means "for brain damaged morons that can't distinguish a good book from the shit of the author". This is why you have women 40+ reading Twilight.
So the books you listed are NOT ya.

>>6801818
>lol i'm shitting on a series to feel cooler because I know the author has more talent in her morning shit that I will ever be able to muster in my whole life
HP 5-7 do have dark themes. Death, revenge, sacrificing your own life to stop the killings, etc. Hardly children's books.

>>6804429
>also, I'm a faggot and went along with Grindewald's evil plan far too long just because I wanted his dick

>>6805755
>characters and stories are superfluous in good literature
Jesus fucking Christ we might have found the most pretentious post in all of /lit/...

>>6805935
I'm not wrong.

>>6801818
>YA is work aimed towards 13+ ages
Baby, YA actually refers to legitimate young adults, like college age. It just so happens that no one reads anymore, so young teens read the same shit as young adults, so it's all the same shit

Also that spoiler fucking frightened me. You should have double-spoilered that shit.

>>6805913
And Voldy is sympathetic?

>>6801792

Comparing Nolan and King. Absolutely pathetic.

Nolan's movies are the only big-budget flicks in Hollywood that have some sort of personal touch to them. Nolan made Memento, arguably one of the greater american movies of the past 20 years. Nolan is celebrated by casuals as much as film buffs, altough not as much by the arthouse scene, such as the peeps at the New Yorker. But the arthouse scene is not at all as big as literary fiction.

What I'm trying to say is, Nolan is Radiohead. And although he hasn't reached the height of his '00s movies in the past few years, he's still far more "respected" in cinema, compared to King. Nolan is Radiohead, man.

>>6805900
pretty weak defence tbh

>>6805755
Characters are very important for literature, and literature has much better characters than genre fiction (where characters exist only to move the plot and a character is considered exceptional if they're "likable"). How can you call characters superfluous and then mention Dostoevsky and Joyce?

>>6805928
Pretty sure the other anon's point was that "dark" themes like death and revenge don't mean something qualifies for the fucking AP exam. Dark doesn't mean depth.

Also doesn't make it a book for adults. Mid teens at the oldest.

>>6806216
Course it don't. I dunno what jabroni was in charge of that AP exam, but that shit wouldn't even fly in a middleschool english class.

>>6799658
I don't know about best villain, but she was certainly just absolutely, beyond infuriating. She's every bureaucratic school admin, and company official's worst side rolled into one cunt. Authority with the absolutely worst intentions who uphold's the organization's stance above the truth.

Every little thing about her is made to infuriate. You wanted to strangle the bitch upon first introduction.

>>6801768
Goblet of Fire I thought was the best of them in terms of everything. Best example of that series.

>>6801801
I wouldn't call them fine, and I actually like them. Nigger goes on and on about shit that's absolutely irrelevant, and I actually ENJOY world building. You could cut 1/3 of his word count and the books would improve for it.

>>6806297
It's very close imo, but the pacing was a bit off - especially at the beginning. The Crouch reveal is not as good as the Sirius reveal, because although it's nice to have more red hearings, it feels like a bit of an asspull, unlike Sirius where everything fits cleanly into place.

>>6801786
>all this asspain over pulp

Nothing wrong with either Rowling or King, nothing wrong with pulp in general. Although neither of them have jack shit on Robert E Howard, muh favorite pulp ever.

>>6805713
Are you telling me you've never revisited series you loved as a kid? I fully intend to re-read the Chronicles of Taran.

I didn't read the Harry Potter books until High School because I never had an interest, then I got the set for Christmas. Not bad, honestly, Rowling has things that she does right. Although she couldn't describe shit with a scratch and sniff.

>>6806318
I feel like she learns from her mistakes too. A lot of things that didn't work in 5 you can clearly see get fixed in 6. 5 was easily the worst book, and 6 one of the strongest, easily the strongest of the final 3 books.