[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 34 KB, 470x379, J.K. Rowling.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1212290 No.1212290 [Reply] [Original]

What is /lit/'s opinion of J.K. Rowling?

>> No.1212291

complete badass

>> No.1212298

The sheer amount of money she has made is pretty insane for a writer.

>> No.1212300

she's a W.I.L.F. or A.I.L.F. depending on what word you use

>> No.1212299

MILF.

>> No.1212302

>>1212298
True, and considering where she was before she wrote Harry Potter makes it even more amazing.

>> No.1212309

>>1212300
>>1212299
>>1212298
>>1212291

How about your opinions of the Harry Potter series?

>> No.1212321

She is a pretty poor writer, but she tells a good story if that makes sense. It is kind of weird in a way. Like a lot of things don't make much sense about the books but you still manage to get lost in the anyway. In my opinion she must have had an amazing editor.

So overall as a children's book it is more engaging and interesting then most, but an example of fine literature it is not.

>> No.1212341

MILF

bad writter but one of the most wise

>> No.1212346

I'd hit it.

>> No.1212354

>>1212309 I'll bite man
>>1212300 okay this was my post
I'll say that I haven't read a Harry Potter book in a long time I'm 21 man C'mon not a big fan of Fan-Fiction or whatever you would classify it as, but It is cool for a kid's book. If you are a teen or even college student who likes them or adult I don't see a problem with it so take no offense by my post. But I have to say it is not my cup of tea.

>> No.1212365

>>1212321

I had a great respect for the woman even despite some of her flaws (the formula within a school-setting, ruining her characterisation of Voldemort in the last couple of books, the unnecessary epilogue, the fact she created a market for some terrible books to be successful etc.)

She basically took elements of your Dahlian suffering orphan child, with some of Narnia/Diana Wynn Jones sensibilities, a good working knowledge of world mythology, and a narrative voice that in the realm of modern children's/young adult fiction has probably only really been trumped by Lemony Snicket since, and turned it into a work that resonated with a sizeable audience.

It's an achievement. Even though part of me wishes many in my generation had moved on to a broader range of books afterwards.

>>1212321

Regarding the interaction of Rowling's magical world with the "muggle" world:

"If Rowling had a choice between something making sense and a joke - she'd choose the joke" - some guy in a past /lit/ thread.

>> No.1212371

it's kind of like Twilight in a way, I'll let you take from that what you will.

>> No.1212384

Wether the books are good or not is irrelevant. She got an entire generation of children reading books and for that I can only applaud her.

>> No.1212399

>>1212365
>snicket

I remember reading those.

THEY EXPLAINED NOTHING

>> No.1212406

Mediocre to Decent writer who latched onto a better then average story and sucked it for all it was worth.

>> No.1212410

I enjoyed Harry Potter but I think the last 3 books were really pure suck compared to the first ones, the end was really cringe worthy stuff.

>> No.1212413

>>1212384
Why is reading a book inherently good? I'm not saying anything positive or negative about Harry Potter, I've only read the first one, but hypothetically how is reading shit a good thing? There isn't something special about a shitty book that makes it better than a good something else.

>> No.1212424

>>1212413

For children, it's good for learning decent language skills, which help throughout life.

>> No.1212430

>>1212365

I agree with most of what you said. Just wanted to respond to a couple of your points, though...

>I had a great respect for the woman even despite some of her flaws (the formula within a school-setting,

I don't really know if I can agree with the fact that formulaic = flawed. If that were true, you'd have to discount a whole heck of a lot of great literature (and bad, to be sure, but that's not the point). I think it's more about what you do with the formula, and I think Rowling did it very well.

>ruining her characterisation of Voldemort in the last couple of books

Been a long time since I read books 6 and 7, but care to elaborate here? I'll probably disagree but I'd like to hear your reasoning.

>> No.1212448

>>1212399

lmao so true

>> No.1212450

Crappy writer who wrote a bunch of crappy books that got crappier and crappier with each sequel, and the only reason her crap is popular is because it has a crappy vocabulary that even the crappiest high school drop out could comprehend with a bunch of crappy wish fulfillment bullshit.

>> No.1212454

I have only a little respect for the story of the Harry Potter series, which I see as on par with some decent mystery novels. Her dialogue varies, for me, from inspired to merely adequate. Where she really shines, though, is in characterization and whimsy. The first few books, before she began having to explain how the wizarding world worked, had absolutely wonderful atmosphere.

>> No.1212472

Harry Potter would have been so delightful if she hadn't gotten too famous for an editor. The third book has a huge plot hole in it if I recall correctly but it is just wonderful. If they'd all been as good as the third book and movie I'd be a big HP nerd.

>> No.1212475
File: 68 KB, 492x376, Tractor_And_Farming_Machines_And_Tools[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1212475

>> No.1212479
File: 2.23 MB, 2592x1944, 06tractor.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1212479

RUN FOR THE HILLS! TRACTORS, TRACTORS EVERYWHE- OH GOD IT'S TOO LATE FOR ME! FLEE! FLEE AND YOUR LIVES MAY BE SPARED THIS ARMAGEDDON!!!

>> No.1212496

>>1212450

>Insult vocabulary
>Use the word "crap" in multiple variations no less than nine times.

Stay classy, bro.

>> No.1212503

>Philosophers Stone
Good
>Chamber of Secrets
Good
>Prisoner of Azkaban
Semi great
>Goblet of Fire
Utter shit
>Order of the Phoenix
Emoshit
>Half Blood Prince
wtf am i reading
>Deathly Hallows
Overwhelmingly underwhelming, terrible end.

>> No.1212505

>>1212496
the Harry Potter fags wouldn't understand me if I used words above that of a fifth grade vocabulary, that's why they read Harry Potter.

>> No.1212535

>>1212472

This can be said of any fantasy writer. The editors become too scared to actually mark their manuscripts with the words "cut these pages the fuck down".

>> No.1212601

well /lit/ is taking a dump

>> No.1212612

>>1212505
0/10

>> No.1212613

ITT: kids trying to look cool by insulting a highly successful series

>> No.1212617
File: 18 KB, 300x450, Twilight2(5).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1212617

>>1212613
Agreed.

>> No.1212619

>>1212617
Finally, someone else who's not hatin' on Twilight!

>> No.1212624

good series for kids. i read it till someone spoiled the 5th book for me. stupid fat bitch.

>> No.1212641

i think shes quite aTRACTORive actually.

>> No.1212644

>>1212365
>>Even though part of me wishes many in my generation had moved on to a broader range of books afterwards.

god, this so bad.
I remember the "smartest" girl in my class bragging about reading them... over and over again. FUCK, cant people just move on to a new book when their done the series?

>> No.1212674

>>1212644

i'm sorry that you're in highschool bro :(

>> No.1212676

>>1212644
yeah, Im homeschooled now, but thanks :)

>> No.1212685

>>1212365 Even though part of me wishes many in my generation had moved on to a broader range of books afterwards.

Sadly, your already fucked generation has been further fucked by Rowling's formulaic shit. Too many of you are going to think the Potter books are literature, when they're nothing more than marketing, and are going to base your literary expectations on the Potter series only to be bitterly disappointed. The "Star Wars" prequels are a goods example of this.

Also, thanks to the huge success of her "Happy Meal Lit", publishers are going to be looking for the "next" Rowling for decades thus fucking over more kids for years to come.

I was fortunate to be an adult when Rowling's first turd was extruded from the presses and thus wasn't caught up in the marketing blitz. I only "read" the books because a nephew got hooked on them. When compared to the books given to me as a child, Dumas, Verne, etc., the Potter series is excrement.

Rowling should be applauded for not going crazy when the money poured in, as the winners of most huge lottery prizes do. And if you don't view her as nothing more than a lottery winner, simply showing up at the right time and place with a manuscript which could be edited, you need to reexamine the whole Potter phenomena.

>> No.1212686

I'd hit that

>> No.1212689

>>1212685

Jesus I can't stand people like you, you manage to start your argument with good stuff and agreeable shit but then retract all of it and make yourself sound retarded.

>> No.1212690
File: 23 KB, 553x553, tractor2.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1212690

>>1212686
WITH A TRACTOR!

>> No.1212695

>>1212689

What did I retract? And where do you think my comments went pear shaped?

I was given authors like Dickens, Verne, Dumas, and others to read as a child and by child I mean 5th grade or so. Compared to the "starter" lit I was exposed to as a kid, the Potter shit is shit.

The usual bleating about the Potter books "at least getting kids to read" is extremely sad. It's akin to feeding children nothing but Happy Meals and Kool Whip while explaining "At least they're eating".

>> No.1212704

I really wish I read Harry Potter when it was popular. I was the perfect age, but for some reason it never interested me.

=(

>> No.1212712

Completely indifferent. I don't really care for Harry Potter nor do I hate it. I didn't enjoy the first book (cut it short) but I can see why other people could like it.

>> No.1212716

>>1212413
because it's a form of therapy, and a sort of introductory ritual.

>> No.1212742

The series's success lies in wish fulfillment. Basically you take a kid who appears at first to be somewhere between poor and normal (i.e. you the reader), then you reveal that they've been awesome all along. Most people in western-cultures consider themselves a cut above the rest, and this type of story really plays at that inherent belief. The stories other strength lies in the escapism, the idea that the world is less mundane than it actually is. In many ways Twilight does the same thing, just worse (boring girl meets vampires vs poor boy meets wizards).

I think the reason many people only like the earlier books is that they pander the most to these aspects, whereas the later books play out the actual storyline (which is itself pretty meh). For those who did enjoy the later books, I think it's a combination of cognitive dissonance and a lack of familiarity with inspired writing.

I guess as for the OP's question, she really played at and monopolized on the psychology of western youth. Whether she did it consciously or not is anyone's guess, but I think she did it amazingly well.

>> No.1213340
File: 44 KB, 450x418, 1266631688780.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1213340

>>1212290

Meh, waaaay too much praise for a plothole filled storyline. Makes me wonder how much skill it really takes to publish a book. Def a case of style over substance, and the style isn't even all that amazing.

>> No.1213349

>>1212742
>The series's success lies in wish fulfillment
applies to any popular book actually. Majority of ppl dont need anything from the books but mental masturbation "Omaigod this book is about me!". Catcher in the Rye was the same shit actually

>> No.1213360

Can someone please show me some of the plot holes I hear so much about?

>> No.1213387

>>1213360

Having a device that allows you to turn back time at will.

>> No.1213413

she was ok until she started to be only a for-profit writer.

>> No.1213420

snape kills dumbledoor

>> No.1213432

Sorcerer's Stone: good
Chamber of Secrets: terrible
Prisoner of Azkaban: great
Goblet of Fire: greatest
Order of the Phoenix: good
Half-Blood Prince: meh
Deathly Hallows: ok

>> No.1213445

Only books by her I've read are Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber of Secrets, and Prisoner of Azkaban. Certainly childrens' fantasy literature, but that doesn't mean it's bad. I've never thought about reading the rest though.

>> No.1213490

>>1213413
Honestly I think in terms of childrens fantasy books, they're the best I've ever seen.

>> No.1213496
File: 20 KB, 320x480, tumblr_lae9q627D61qb73e1o1_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1213496

That is how I feel about her work. Not the greatest, but I credit it with getting me reading in the first place.

>> No.1213498

>>1213496

Reading is having to recruit from the ranks of uncommitted fashion-followers. It's sad, but I suppose we need people like you.

>> No.1213505

>>1213498
In my defense, I was seven years old.

>> No.1213510

>>1213505

Even so, man.

>> No.1213519 [DELETED] 

I was only 11 when Harry Potter 1 was popular at my school, and even then I had taste enough to know it was fucking garbage.

>> No.1213645

>>1213498
oh jesus, kill yourself

>> No.1214042

i want to know something... has she written anything since she ended harry potter? i mean something not related to harry potter.