Literary Comparisons for HP (was Harry Potter: A Worthwhile Series?)

[GulPlum]

No: HPFGUIDX 33726

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
> GulPlum wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure you can really comment on JKR's 
> "ambitions" per se though, and she's definitely said that she did 
*not* 
> have a target audience (of any age).  She is a storyteller, and I 
think 
> she'd agree with your assessment in that regard.  I'm not so sure 
she'd 
> agree that her one & only purpose in writing HP is to give children 
> pleasure.  I don't think she writes with a target audience in mind 
or 
> with such a limited purpose specifically in mind either. I agree 
that 
> her success has been surprising to her, and she's said as much many 
> times.  But I think that's more because she expected only a limited 
> "cult-like" following of her work, rather than the overwhelming 
> international sensation that it has become.

OK, when I said that her intention was to "give children pleasure", I 
suppose I should've said "give her readers pleasure". :-) I'm with 
you on the doubts that "children" are the target readership, although 
JKR *is* on record (sorry, I can't look up specifics right now) as 
stating that the books should ultimately appeal to (something like) 
12 year-olds and above.  I stress the "and above" - after all, books, 
like movies, or any other art form, are about a baseline of 
understanding - anyone who has reached that baseline can appreciate 
them. One of the issues is, of course, just where that basline lies. 

One of JKR's more extraordinary achievements is that adults don't 
feel patronised by her storylines or style, which (as evidenced by 
several posts in this thread) can't be said for all readers of CS 
Lewis. That some elements of her plotting or characterisations are 
just a little simplified is something for which many people 
(including myself) are prepared to make allowances.

On to the bit that I *knew* would be controversial and would need 
explaining. :-) I toyed with the idea of eplaining it in my previous 
last post, but it was already getting a lot longer than I'd 
anticipated. :-)

> The Bobbsey Twins are "distinguished" company??!  Perhaps I'm 
selling 
> the series short since it's been a good many years since I read one 
of 
> them, if ever.  

<snip>
 
> This is like HP .... *how*???  I'm genuinely curious why you made 
this 
> particular comparison.

Ahh... I said originally that I wasn't making comparisons on the 
basis of literary merit as such, but as a more personal experience. 

As a child of the sixties brought up in a working-class home in the 
UK, the Bobbsey Twins books were a revelation to me. I must add that 
I've not read any of them for 30 years or so, so I'm incapable of 
making any specific comments sbout the content.

However, one of the few Xmas presents I remember getting pre-teen 
years was a set of something like 40 Bobbsey Twins books when I was 
9. This opened a whole new world to me, a literary (and geographic) 
world outside the England of CS Lewis, Blyton or other authors I'd 
already read by that stage. This was a larger world, inhabited by 
characters completely outside my sphere of understanding, using a 
language I could recognise, but which was strange nonetheless.

I was already an avid reader, but the books to which I had access 
were English, not American. The Bobbsey Twins were my first inkling 
that another world existed. In using the Bobbsey Twins as an example, 
I could just as well have said the Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew. The fact 
remains, though, that I've never read either of those. :-)

My experience with the Bobbseys is just one of the reasons that I'm 
particularly obssessed with not seeing any point whatsoever in 
the "Americanisation" of the US editions of Harry Potter. If I, at 9, 
could appreciate some of the nuances, then I really cannot understand 
why the reverse should not apply WRT American readers of Harry Potter.
Those bits I really couldn't understand, I learned about. With 
others, I made assumptions. Overall, though, it was a worthwhile 
experience which has stood me in good stead ever since.

I went on from the Bobbsey Twins to Jennings, who is probably as much 
of an anachronism today as the Bobbsey Twins (though chronologically 
he comes a lot, lot later). Few people in the UK have got into the 
series within the last 30 years, and Anthony Buckeridge is probably 
absolutely unknown in the US. I won't even try to explain what 
Jennings is about, but think of him as a non-magical Harry Potter at 
a (fictional) UK Public (ie private in US-speak) School about 40 
years earlier (Jennings didn't age between books; I don't recall 
exactly, but he was perpetually about 11).

Here's the official web site which has lots of info (though probably 
not enough for complete novices): http://www.linbury-court.co.uk 
(Linbury Court was the name of Jennings' school).

Jennings was my absolute hero between the ages of about 10 to 12, 
when James Bond took over. :-)

> If you're new & interested, we had some discussions on the topic of 
how 
> to class HP within the last month (there were also discussions in 
April 
> and August of 2001 I believe).  Many would agree with you that HP 
is 
> just childrens' fantasy literature -- I would not.

Although that was my first post, I've been lurking around here in one 
form or another since the beginning of December, and I'm aware of 
most of the topics which have been discussed, and even know the POVs 
of several of the more prolific posters. :-) 

As for the characterisation of HP as childrens' fantasy literature, 
I'm largely with you, although I have my doubts.  I was very tempted 
to wade into the discussion of that topic a couple of weeks ago, but 
by the time I felt ready to contribute, the thread had gone off in a 
different direction. I have, however, tried to introduce the topic to 
alt.fan.harry-potter, where it went off at a different tangent and 
left me equally unsatisfied. My current feeling, though, is that I'll 
reserve judgment until Book Seven comes out.

> Er ... I wouldn't be so sure about the assumptions you're making in 
> terms of the number of males versus females in this group OR that 
women 
> wouldn't necessarily be familiar with the Fleming books.  :)

>From lurking here for well over a month, the number of prolific 
presumably female posters outnumbers thoe presumably male ones by a 
factor of perhaps 2:1. That is perhaps an erroneous perception, but 
it's the one I have. :-) 

As for Bond, I have honestly never met in the real world a female of 
whatever age who would admit to having read any of the books, whereas 
I know few men of my age group who hadn't read some (if not all) of 
them. I am by no means saying that no woman ever has, just as there 
are probably men who read Mills & Boon - I'm just saying that they're 
not very likely to have done. :-)

-- 
Richard Sliwa AKA GulPlum