Harry Potter and the Half-Baked Plot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkshadow03

I've found in my experience that the professors who were the most critical of genre fiction were the ones who had never read any of it.

---

Unfortunately my professor did not hand me a list of every single work he has read when he made the comment.

The food analogy is hardly perfect, but the basic gist of it is that as one begins enjoying a higher quality of literature, one begins enjoying lower quality literature even less because our expectations have been utterly destroyed by the literature we have previously read. For example, after reading Hamlet, my understanding is that the limits of poetic imagination are so great that anything I read thereafter is a downgrade and does cannot hope to live up to the standard of Hamlet.

Of course I agree with you regarding food. Taste is extraordinarily subjective and open-ended when compared with literature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkshadow03

I've found in my experience that the professors who were the most critical of genre fiction were the ones who had never read any of it.

---

Gasp... that's such a rhetorical argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mayneverhave

Unfortunately my professor did not hand me a list of every single work he has read when he made the comment.

The food analogy is hardly perfect, but the basic gist of it is that as one begins enjoying a higher quality of literature, one begins enjoying lower quality literature even less because our expectations have been utterly destroyed by the literature we have previously read. For example, after reading Hamlet, my understanding is that the limits of poetic imagination are so great that anything I read thereafter is a downgrade and does cannot hope to live up to the standard of Hamlet.

Of course I agree with you regarding food. Taste is extraordinarily subjective and open-ended when compared with literature.

---

Heh. I wouldn't expect your professor to hand out a list of every single work he has read. Certainly I exaggerate. However, when I was looking for a mentor to write my Honors Thesis in undergrad (on Science Fiction about Mars) a lot of the professors who made the distateful or blatant statement "why would you want to waste time on that?" it only took a little probing through conversation about the topic and particular genre-canonical titles for me to figure out that they hadn't read much Sci-fi or fantasy at all. Though, a lot of my professors were open to Tolkien.

I would actually extend the food analogy. Sometimes I want Thai food, sometimes Mexican, sometimes Korean barbecue, sometimes a greasy diner burger, sometimes a slice of pizza, sometimes some italian food, and sometimes a four-star French cuisine. This explains my reading tastes. It's not about better or worse for me; it's about difference. I've already summarized a lot of these points in a more concrete fashion here in answering the "why do I read question?" at this link.

There actually is a lot of room for subjective tastes in literature. Very few American universities teach strictly the Canon anymore for better or worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkshadow03

Heh. I wouldn't expect your professor to hand out a list of every single work he has read. Certainly I exaggerate. However, when I was looking for a mentor to write my Honors Thesis in undergrad (on Science Fiction about Mars) a lot of the professors who made the distateful or blatant statement "why would you want to waste time on that?" it only took a little probing through conversation about the topic and particular genre-canonical titles for me to figure out that they hadn't read much Sci-fi or fantasy at all. Though, a lot of my professors were open to Tolkien.

---

Haven't you thought that maybe it's for this very reason, that there is very little to no literary value in genre literature, that your professors haven't read much of it?

I tend to read either classics or sci-fi. It's true that there is little literary value in most sci-fi, and perhaps that is why English professors wouldn't be that interested, but i would say there is alot of value in it in other ways. Some of the most challenging and philosophical books i've read have been sci-fi. Plus there is alot of overlap, 1984 could be banded sci-fi.

The problem with the "at least they are reading" is that it sounds like a major acomplishment. It is not. People will read, there will be books filling the places of any best-seller writer. And sorry, when people - I will use Paulo Coelho because major markets like America or Europe the damage is minor - read Paulo Coelho, praise him and not go to the original sources or better writers because Paulo Coelho is helped by a major system of marketing then he is Damaging brazilian culture. How many of you people here even know the name of another brazilian writer? Maybe some will say Machado de Assis but how many have read him? Or Vinicius (some may know him as a musicist, but before it he was a hell of poet), or Drummond, or Monteiro Lobato, Manuel Bandeira, Guimaraes Rosa? Those guys are awesome but they are not best-seller writers. Today the market, the model is Paulo Coelho. As result... meh...Even if Brazil achived the highest level of literacy in our story, brazilians read only 3 books a year. We do not have today a writing habit because the writers read do not build a public, a reading love.
Then another point, "First readers, then writers" - The future generations of writers are going to be those "at least they are reading?". Meh, imagine "at least they are writing." If the model is best-seller (Dan Brown style or Self Help like Paulo Coelho) then imagine what they will produce one day. They must move foward. (Harry Potter fanboyism is a major problem I think, but that is a market effect, does not say much about the book). I must say that Stephen King (at least until the time I used to read him, early 90's) at least left signals pointing to the next step. King pointed to the old horror movies and magazine stories (which could lead one to Bradbury) but also to Poe or Lovecraft. At least this function his books could have (plus he was not that nice, his books are big, a bit dense, sometimes life was not easier for his readers). Tolkien pretty much the same. I do not think Dan Brown have lead to anything except more cheap literature and books about his own book. That is the kind of reading that meh. (I always disliked the easy defense : It is just fun, I can read in two hours and put aside, without anything to bug my head. Alas, we are talking about an art, we can not be happy with a book which experience is justified when we forget about it. Books are meant to be remembered).
Finishing, I have nothing against fantasy. I dislike genre definitions but if there was ever a genre in literature is fantasy.

i would rather a world in which the population was literate not illiterate

there might not be any intellectual reward for reading Harry Potter, but to say that it is worse than watching TV is total rubbish... that implies you would rather have a population who can't read, which is quite scary to be honest.

JBI calculated that to read the Harry Potter series would take around 60 hours - i would argue he has spent just as much time moaning about Harry Potter on here. it is clear to me which is the biggest waste of time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkshadow03

I would actually extend the food analogy. Sometimes I want Thai food, sometimes Mexican, sometimes Korean barbecue, sometimes a greasy diner burger, sometimes a slice of pizza, sometimes some italian food, and sometimes a four-star French cuisine. This explains my reading tastes. It's not about better or worse for me; it's about difference. I've already summarized a lot of these points in a more concrete fashion here in answering the "why do I read question?" at this link.

There actually is a lot of room for subjective tastes in literature. Very few American universities teach strictly the Canon anymore for better or worse.

---

And i agree with you here. I can quite easily finish a classic, and go straight into a fantasy or childrens book, and still get as much enjoyment out of it.
***
One of my nephews is a complete brainbox when it comes to maths. when he was in primary school, the school entered him into loads of chess comps and maths comps because he was so good. The problem was they were so focused on his math, logic and science, that they didnt notice his poor quality reading and writing. He was so bad they where considering keeping him back a year so he would be a year later going to secondary school. To prevent that, they gave him extra classes and gave him harry Potter to read which he did quite slowly.
when he finished the first one, rather than wait for the teachers to give him the next one, he came to me and asked me could he borrow the next one, which i gave him. He started to enjoy them so much (now remember he didnt read at all. was computers and chess mad.) that his reading pregressed until he had all five read within a year. (now i know you are all thinking, thats rather slow, but he was a very poor reader, and it took him a long time to read the first one) His teachers were pleased with the improvements and the fact that he was showing an inititive to read. So were all of us at home. I ended up buying him the first five books, which where out at the time, as a christmas present, which he was very happy with. After that, he started coming to me looking for more books. As he liked the themes that ran through Potter, i gave him Garth Nix Sabrael, Lireal and Abhorsen. And he liked these too. When the school decided they werent going to hold him back from secondary school because his reading and writing improved dramaticly withing a year and half period, they gaving him the school reading list for the Secondary school he had chossen to go to. On it Was Artemis Fowl. So my nephew came to me looking for the book as he wanted to read it before he started school. He loved these, and i think he agrees with me they are better than Potter.
Over the last four years, he has gone from being someone who wasnt a reader, and hated the thought of reading to someone who cant get enough of it. He still plays his computer games and his chess, but he also makes his time for reading, which is something i'm very proud of. He is almost fourteen now, and he has said that had it not been for his teachers giving him Potter, he wouldnt have enjoyed reading as much as he does today. I havent given him any classics yet, because i think its important for him to enjoy reading childrens and young adults books before i throw a dickens at him.
This comes from my own personal experience. I've plenty of stories from parents who have been into the shops i supervise also, but i thought this was the better story to tell you all. Now if that doesnt give Potter worth and also show that it can encourage kids to read, then i give up trying to argue the point.

This story can be told with almost any book .There is no reason why to believe Harry Potter have more power to turn people in readers than any other fantasy flick. I would say that freedom your newphew had to pick his books is considerable more important than what he picked. (And I would say Freedom is not complete in a world like ours, where fashion and market give no room to breath).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hank Stamper

i would rather a world in which the population was literate not illiterate

---

I have a huge problem with the simplistic reasoning. First reading is quite useless by itself. Whoever thinks reading makes sense without saying what is read is just unable to shake off the notion that several societies existed and exist with almost the same (un)happiness we have today without the predominance of written text. Writing is also a toy for social domination.
Another problem is that, we believe in equality, so It is fair to think everyone must have access to all knowledge (or possiblity of access) because it means a way to personal freedom. That is why we try to make everyone read. But accepting just it is ridiculous. It is but a step, the very first, not the final. There is no sense in teaching people how to use keys but telling that a few doors must remain shut. That is why Blue Beard was a villain and curiosity a feeling that only free people can enjoy.
So, peoeple must read, not just to read,but to have access to the knowledge humanity places in books. To have access to reading codes in the books. Obviously, some books are unable to perform such task.

Quote:

---

there might not be any intellectual reward for reading Harry Potter, but to say that it is worse than watching TV is total rubbish... that implies you would rather have a population who can't read, which is quite scary to be honest.

---

Scary is forgetting that TV is just a media. Akira Kurosawa, Goddard and Kubrick are showed in the television, just a way to show audio-visual products. A media. Just like books. Being a book - a writing text - it is not garantee of superiority over oral tradition, paiting, music, movies, and the other arts. I would say however reads too much but listen to no music is almost like a illiterate. Believing a book is superior to anything just because it is a book is not understand the question.

Quote:

---

JBI calculated that to read the Harry Potter series would take around 60 hours - i would argue he has spent just as much time moaning about Harry Potter on here. it is clear to me which is the biggest waste of time.

---

I do not know JBI much, sometimes reading him I feel he trust in absolutes too much or write them, but this kind of attack - this veiled censorship is funny. Critics are a very relevant part of literature. Thinking is a key. I would not hunt down the Harry Potter fans (because I reckon people may just like something) but thinking it is a waste of time, or that he should not do what he pleases while doing the exactly same JKRowling does (writing) is absurd. She is now a holy woman because she writes?

Can i ask why everyone wants to pick on J.K. Rowling and the Harry Potter books when there are books out there that are getting a lot of credit, and are really bad? would it not be more worht your while debating the point of book three of the Inheritance trilogy, or some other story? why is it always Potter? Is it because of the fame Rowling got? How much Money she made? Does it really matter if its not shakespeare? I mean they are kids books. Yes alot of adults read them, but alot of adults love reading kids books. i know i do. They are not as bad as you are all making them out to be.

I truly wonder if there has been some kind of a scientific study about the people who have started reading from Harry Potter and then moved on to more challenging literature. Of course, it would be quite problematic how to measure how challenging a book is, but perhaps it would be possible to create study in the style of - if people start reading from Harry Potter, what happens to their reading habits. I am quite curious.
On the other hand, I am not very certain how social sciences studies are made - perhaps it is impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Etienne

Haven't you thought that maybe it's for this very reason, that there is very little to no literary value in genre literature, that your professors haven't read much of it?

---

Ironically enough, I think this captures the point I was making. If they haven't READ ANY, how the hell do they know about the literary value of genre fiction one way or the other!

Besides the story ends with me eventually finding a mentor in the English department who had taught Sci-fi courses to mentor my thesis. For all the short-sighted professors, there are plenty of universities teaching Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror courses, and there are plenty of tenured professors in literature writing positively about genre fiction. My friend even was lucky enough to take a grad course on Science fiction. Much genre fiction does have strong literary values. Here are three genre books I read this year that I thought were excellent and of a pretty high quality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hank Stamper

JBI calculated that to read the Harry Potter series would take around 60 hours - i would argue he has spent just as much time moaning about Harry Potter on here. it is clear to me which is the biggest waste of time.

---

It's funny I was thinking that exact same thing!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCamilo

I do not know JBI much, sometimes reading him I feel he trust in absolutes too much or write them, but this kind of attack - this veiled censorship is funny. Critics are a very relevant part of literature. Thinking is a key. I would not hunt down the Harry Potter fans (because I reckon people may just like something) but thinking it is a waste of time, or that he should not do what he pleases while doing the exactly same JKRowling does (writing) is absurd. She is now a holy woman because she writes?

---

How is this censorship? He's playfully criticizing JBI's point that Harry Potter is a waste of time by pointing out how much time JBI spends on multiple threads criticizing Harry Potter, a book he doesn't think is worth much, with people who probably aren't going to change their minds, when he himself could've been doing something far more productive. It's he just pointing out the irony.

As for censorship, there is nothing stopping JBI from posting a response. The moderators haven't jumped in and started deleting posts left and right, declaring "Thou Shalt not criticize the Potter" on these boards. I fail to see how he is being censored.

Criticism of criticism is the life-blood of academia and intellectualism. In fact if we look at what just happened JBI criticized people who read Potter (to oversimplify his point a bit), Hank criticized JBI's criticism, you criticized Hank's criticism of JBI's criticism, and I just criticized your criticism of Hank's criticism of JBI's criticism. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drkshadow03

Ironically enough, I think this captures the point I was making. If they haven't READ ANY, how the hell do they know about the literary value of genre fiction one way or the other!

Besides the story ends with me eventually finding a mentor in the English department who had taught Sci-fi courses to mentor my thesis. For all the short-sighted professors, there are plenty of universities teaching Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror courses, and there are plenty of tenured professors in literature writing positively about genre fiction. My friend even was lucky enough to take a grad course on Science fiction. Much genre fiction does have strong literary values. Here are three genre books I read this year that I thought were excellent and of a pretty high quality.

---

I love hte Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy, but its on of those series where it starts to loose it with so long and thanks for all the fish. Personally i think it should have ended with life the universe and everything.
Not a sci-fi, but have you read the fantasy series Bitterbynde saga by Cecilia Dart Thornton. it is an amazing feat that really brings to life the folklore and mythology of Britain and Ireland. This definitely has a literary quality.

Deleting, editing, etc are not the only form of censorship. If everytime someone (Ok, JBI seems to be a lot this someone) open critics to HP or J.K Rowling he is attacked because of his motives (jealousy or watever) or how meaningless is the critical exercise he does (as if you should only do critics about things you like) and not by what he is saying, this is a form of censorship. Subbtle and all, but it is rather annoying to see every discussion be 1 - ignored the critics , 2 - attack the critic reasons. Maybe that is why he is so adamant in his critics. (Maybe not, maybe he feels it is his obligation to do it, I dunno, but it does not matter)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niamh

Can i ask why everyone wants to pick on J.K. Rowling and the Harry Potter books when there are books out there that are getting a lot of credit, and are really bad? would it not be more worht your while debating the point of book three of the Inheritance trilogy, or some other story? why is it always Potter? Is it because of the fame Rowling got? How much Money she made? Does it really matter if its not shakespeare? I mean they are kids books. Yes alot of adults read them, but alot of adults love reading kids books. i know i do. They are not as bad as you are all making them out to be.

---

I must point I did not considered the initial topic of this thred that worth and I would ignore it if the subject didn't move to something more interesting which is the reading habits.
Now, HP gets more bashing because it gets more praising. (Not saying it is right, but that is why). A simple matter of action and reaction. I am sure during the Da Vinci fever, Dan Brown was the usual cullprint.
Being Kids books is not excuse, it must be even a matter of responsability. We had another thread recently and I think it was pointed 1 - HP is not just a kids book, aiming for a mature audience as well 2 - Among the Kids books we have Alice books or Treasure Island, both complex and very well written books, meaning being a kids books does not mean being a plain simple book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCamilo

Subbtle and all, but it is rather annoying to see every discussion be 1 - ignored the critics , 2 - attack the critic reasons.

---

so the critic's reasoning is absolute? rubbish! i am as much entitled to challenge the critic as the critic is entitled to challenge the literary merits of harry potter