Harry Potter

[JBI]

Nah, that people go on after Potter to read better books has, by means of data (ironically biased in her favor), been discredited. I think I posted the link here before.

The point though is, good Children's literature should be enjoyable by people of all ages, without any loss. Carrol does this, Christina Rossetti does this, the point is, it is doable and has been done.

Potter offers something else, a more maturing progression of books, which, as critics have pointed out, seems to mature with the readers. This means, 20 years down the road, a hypothetical child will not be able to have the same affect as the original readers, as the books will be put down as if in one span, instead of divided over many years. He will in fact, be under-mature, or over-mature for the books, simply by having them all available at once.

That being said, the question remains whether those are good children's literature, or have matured out of children's literature, or simply aren't literature, but as Harold Bloom put it (to his great horror, as he still claims to get angry mail on account of it) slush.

The choice is up to the person of course, but lets be honest, if it cannot be studied, if it cannot recreate its affects, if it cannot be anything but enjoyed by kids (which I think I have pointed out, cannot really enjoy them as kids) than I think we may need to listen to Bloom, or perhaps acknowledge that, though these perhaps can be entertaining, they are neither good nor bad. Fashion magazines can be loads of fun, but how much attention should we give them? This perhaps may be a little better than that, but I think, like all books, the decline will occur (it already has started) and the books will flicker into oblivion. The problem with Rowling is that she had too few critics while writing her books, and failed to gain any critical feedback to improve her writing. This is OK of course, if you are Emily Dickinson, but not if you make grammar mistakes and drop clichés constantly. If perhaps she got some feedback, instead of countless praise, she could have fixed her problems by book 7. As it is, I think they got worse, as the haste to make the money, and the hype of the books gave Rowling too much confidence.

[Drkshadow03]

The choice is up to the person of course, but lets be honest, if it cannot be studied, if it cannot recreate its affects, if it cannot be anything but enjoyed by kids (which I think I have pointed out, cannot really enjoy them as kids) than I think we may need to listen to Bloom, or perhaps acknowledge that, though these perhaps can be entertaining, they are neither good nor bad.

::sighs:: Here we go again with the overgeneralizations.

English 440: Harry Potter's Library: J. K. Rowling, Texts, and Contexts

A Popular Culture Class Syllabus

Harry Potter has been added to the Syllabus of A-Levels in the UK

ENG 470/ENG 504 (Grad): Symbols and Archetypes in Children's Literature

Harry Potter and Philosophy

ENG 305: Literature for Children

ENG 349: Fantasy

That is 7 syllabi from different universities, with the exception of the A-Level one, teaching Harry Potter at a college level in various different contexts and disciplines. Believe me I could have found a lot more. Granted these aren't top-tier Ivy league colleges, but still . . .

A quick search in MLA database reveals there have been at least 57 peer-reviewed essays, 9 scholarly books, and 4 dissertations written about Harry Potter to date all with genuine Ph. D.s, imagine that, and keep in mind MLA doesn't index everything. So I'm sure there are quite a few other essays in anthologies or journals that it missed. In all fairness a few of the dissertations seem more interested in the Harry Potter phenomena, but the majority of the essays are good old genuine look deep at the structures of the text and write about the meaning literary criticism.

My point here isn't Harry Potter = good, or HP = literature with a capital "L." I don't really care about that; I'm not even sure I disagree with you on that point in fact. However, time will decide that one no matter what you or I or Harold Bloom opine. I only wanted to point out that you just claimed above HP cannot be studied; well, apparently someone is studying it and writing about it. So that's fundamentally untrue.

Also, I read the Harry Potter series and enjoyed it in my 20s. I also happen to enjoy more "traditional" literature. Why I even have a Masters degree in English, imagine that! Most of the people I've talked to who I know have read and enjoyed Harry Potter were also in 20s. Ergo, your other thesis about some set readership age is pretty bogus too.

[curlyqlink]

the Harry Potter books were written for young readers and should be enjoyed as such.

This is a deliciously double-edged statement. I'll devilishly take it to mean that the Harry Potters are children's books, which should be read only by children!

7 syllabi from different universities, with the exception of the A-Level one, teaching Harry Potter at a college level

College students are not children, hence they should not be reading Harry Potter. And certainly not in class. I just take this as further evidence of the sad decline of standards in higher education. I'm sure many universities also offer their clients (er, students) the chance to "study" comic books (er, graphic novels) for college credit.

Rowling's books seem to have started a trend that is currently being mined by the Stephanie Myers vampire franchise. That is, big fat children's books that adults are not ashamed to read, though perhaps they ought to be.

[Drkshadow03]

College students are not children, hence they should not be reading Harry Potter. And certainly not in class. I just take this as further evidence of the sad decline of standards in higher education. I'm sure many universities also offer their clients (er, students) the chance to "study" comic books (er, graphic novels) for college credit.

Rowling's books seem to have started a trend that is currently being mined by the Stephanie Myers vampire franchise. That is, big fat children's books that adults are not ashamed to read, though perhaps they ought to be.

Oh believe me, I have extremely mixed feelings about what passes for English Lit education these days.

I do disagree with you on graphic novels. Some graphic novels are really good and of a very high quality. "Watchmen" comes to mind to name just one. It's not like they are sitting there and reading Superman or Spiderman after all.

Basically my position on this falls somewhere in the middle. I hate the fact that one doesn't generally get to read a lot of classics by the time your finished with a 4 year undergrad program, and an MA, works that I definitely should have read. On the other hand, I do think it may be valuable and worthwhile studying Children's Literature or fantasy or graphic novels or some other specialized topic, that literary studies should not be limited solely to more traditional works. Part of this is the fact that I think a lot of works that are non-canonical are actually pretty good, original, and do have something to offer the reader. I am actually more concerned with how much time is spent on theory than I am on whether we are reading Chaucer or graphic novels.

One could convincingly argue that many professors are turning to writing about Harry Potter, secondary novels by major Canonical authors, and other genre/pop culture works because it's difficult to find something new to say about the classics which have been written about to death. Some of it is money to fill up classrooms certainly; Harry Potter is no doubt popular. However, I do think a genuine interest exists among certain scholars, particularly those interested in fantasy and Children's lit as their subject area(s) of expertise.

[Jozanny]

Rowling's books seem to have started a trend that is currently being mined by the Stephanie Myers vampire franchise. That is, big fat children's books that adults are not ashamed to read, though perhaps they ought to be.

I've never opened a Potter book in my life, but I think this is unfair to Rowling and her achievement. Like me, she was on the dole, but unlike me, she did something, and that something is not so bad. Harry is a young boy who faces daunting obstacles, including the tragedy of losing mother and father, and his journey is that of the hero who grows into actually becoming one. I've read enough about the books to know that Rowling does have thematic intent, and something to say--I'm not going to trash that either through envy or elitism--and I may read the series one day.

Children's literature beloved of adults is nothing new. I still have a place in my heart for Charlotte's Web.

I think what Rowling's detractors are actually reacting to, is the modern distaste for corporate franchise, and that is a separate issue from artistic merit.

[JBI]

Who is saying that is studying Harry Potter the same way one would study Shakespeare. I go to university, you can get degrees in anything. I know a professor with a degree in Star Trek who teaches, that's not the point. the fact remains, that the question we ask ourselves when studying Harry Potter is always too look at the culture significance, and not at the text itself. With Shakespeare we look into the text, with Potter we look into the sales.

[stlukesguild]

JBI... good to see you back... and still is rare form... trashing Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings in virtually one fell swoop. At least I won't be the sole elitist snob here any more.

[Etienne]

I wish people read Aristotle as much as Harry Potter

[Jozanny]

Who is saying that is studying Harry Potter the same way one would study Shakespeare. I go to university, you can get degrees in anything. I know a professor with a degree in Star Trek who teaches, that's not the point. the fact remains, that the question we ask ourselves when studying Harry Potter is always too look at the culture significance, and not at the text itself. With Shakespeare we look into the text, with Potter we look into the sales.

I don't think anyone, not Drk or myself, certainly, is saying Potter is comparative to Shakespeare. Universities don't grow in a vacuum JBI. They want money too, and Potter is, for better or worse, a mega enterprise beyond its author, who must be worth a few billion or more. One looks at cultural and textual issues both.

[Drkshadow03]

Who is saying that is studying Harry Potter the same way one would study Shakespeare. I go to university, you can get degrees in anything. I know a professor with a degree in Star Trek who teaches, that's not the point. the fact remains, that the question we ask ourselves when studying Harry Potter is always too look at the culture significance, and not at the text itself. With Shakespeare we look into the text, with Potter we look into the sales.

Uhm, except you're still wrong. A lot of the scholarship on Potter does in fact look at the text; you know, literary criticism just like you would do with Shakespeare's text, looking at the structures, the characters, the symbols, with no mention of Potter's cultural popularity at all. It is, however, true, that there are also plenty of studies that look at its popularity from a cultural studies perspective, perhaps even most of it when you add up the dissertations and the books. However, at least 27 of the 57 peer-reviewed articles are genuine literary criticism. At least 10 of those were in another language so I couldn't tell one way or another, and the rest were about his popularity and sales and audience response.

So when you write "when studying Harry Potter is always too [sic] look at the culture significance, and not at the text itself" (emphasis mine) you're factually wrong and still making overgeneralizations.

Like I said I have mixed feelings about the place of other literatures in relation to the more traditional canon. I think there is room to study both and there are reasons to study both. I am NOT saying Rowling is better than Shakespeare or even the equivalent of.

On the other hand, having read a little bit of the textual scholarship on Potter I do think there are some interesting things going on in Potter that are worth noting and documenting and thinking about.

[Jozanny]

On the other hand, having read a little bit of the textual scholarship on Potter I do think there are some interesting things going on in Potter that are worth noting and documenting and thinking about.

I am pleased you and I finally seem to agree about something. I actually admire Rowling a great deal, and keep asking myself "if she could do it, why can't I?"

Although I haven't examined that answer too closely. She did get very lucky to have her work promoted just so to catch fire.

[Ovid Reader]

I cannot put in words how much I despise Harry Potter as a work of literature and plain reading material but I also have an irrational hate of Shakespeare and Dickens so I am probably not the greatest judge of a good book or author.

[Jozanny]

I cannot put in words how much I despise Harry Potter as a work of literature and plain reading material but I also have an irrational hate of Shakespeare and Dickens so I am probably not the greatest judge of a good book or author.

Is this an intrinsic dislike of reading for entertainment? I ask out of curiosity, since I enjoy more authors than others, just as anyone, but "irrational hate" is fairly strong language, something I would reserve for only the most vile polemics--but then again I do not read much that is in the vein of the Klu Klux Klan.

[Hayley Zero]

I have liked the Harry Potter books very much when I was young, but now I'm seventeen and don't really care about them anymore. I didn't even read the last book, actually.
Now I only cherish the memory of how I once read Harry Potter all night long, dressed up like Hermione Granger and made my Hogwarts housework using a feather and ink. It's part of my childhood - like many other books.

[Jueno]

I have liked the Harry Potter books very much when I was young, but now I'm seventeen and don't really care about them anymore. I didn't even read the last book, actually.
Now I only cherish the memory of how I once read Harry Potter all night long, dressed up like Hermione Granger and made my Hogwarts housework using a feather and ink. It's part of my childhood - like many other books.

Ha Very well put.