Defend OOTP against my horribly Muggle mind!

[feetmadeofclay]

No: HPFGUIDX 76343

Dear Grownups... 

I have a question to ask of those here... And of course this 
assignment is optional.  I just want to know what all you (whom I am 
sure are intelligent insightful adults) have to say against me.  I 
know not all people agree.  Afterall I hate pineapples but liking 
pineapples isn't bad... But hear me out and respond if you like.


I have consistently felt that while I like Harry Potter's universe, 
OOTP is not a great or even good novel. (Trust me when I say I didn't 
want to think this.) It is (in my opinion) dully written and filled 
with hackneyed phrases.  This hampers my ability to see beyond its 
surface. It is undenyably repetative - harping on the same points 
like Umbridge looking like a toad and clearing her throat.  I don't 
have my book here... (it was so expensive that it is making the 
rounds with friends) but "hot on his heels" is hardly a phrase I 
expect during one of the most dramatic scenes in the novel.  And 
Hensher of the Spectator was right "feathery cannonball" is truely 
lamentable writing.  Neither really funny nor terribly vivid.  Also 
she used a similar allusion with Errol before anyway. 

Though it takes on the ideas of racism, parental fallibility, 
burgeoning sexuality, and a dozen other dark parts of adult life - 
IMO it fails to scratch beneath the surface of these ideas and 
explore what they mean. Instead Rowling uses them more as mere plot 
devices.  For example...I never get the feeling Hermione suffers in 
her quest to help the elves (as abolistionists did in the 18th and 
19th centuries) nor does she suffer for being the victim or racism 
(as children still do around the world). No teacher keeps her down.  
Noone beats her to a pulp.  (She's not scared of Draco's threats even 
if they anger her.)   

 So while the themes may be good, I FEEL (and I know this is a 
personal opinion) Rowling has provided little in the way of insight 
into these themes or the human experience.  Harry neither appears 
traumatised nor truely in pain to me.  I want to see it the way you 
do; try and convince me.  I'd love to change my mind.  His suffering 
seems nothing more than that of a bratty teen.  And while we may 
remember being that way (I do), I can't say I felt I learned anything 
about what it means to be a teenager. 

Do books have to do all this?  Well IMO good books do!  That is what 
it means to be a good book. Otherwise why read? Reading is meant to 
to add to our stock of experience by entertaining us.  Even light 
parody does this by teaching us to challange what we know and read. 
Is OOTP just brain candy or is it literature? It can't be both.  This 
of course doesn't mean literature (and OOTP, if it is litertature) 
can't be fun too. (though I didn't find OOTP to be so).  I don't 
subscribe to the school that say "no pain no gain".  But I enjoy the 
classics and many of the newer books I read.  Some I like more than 
others but I think overall I rarely read bad novels.  And I like 
children's books so that is not it... Michael Bedard's stunning 
Redwork is one of my favourite novels.  It deals with the horror of 
war and how it can profoundly damage and taint the average soldier.  
I deals with its hero's sexuality in a way that is both subtle and 
senstive but unique the experience of that character.  So in short I 
like teenage characters and children's literature.  (Of all kinds - 
dark and light)  

I will say I like things about OOTP (since I have irked people who 
feel the need to hear the positive...). I think Rowling has talent - 
no question.  Whoever said Snape is great because he has a rough 
interior to go with that gruff exterior was right... He is great.  So 
is Arthur Weasley.  Sweet, good, a little eccentric. But 
uncomplicatedly decent (in the best way of course). 

In OOTP... I liked that Harry just forgot about his second year and 
what it meant to Ginny. I thought that displayed selfishness (and 
would have liked to have seen him interplay with that idea more).  I 
adored Percy's selfish arrogance. I loved Neville's time at St. 
Mungos (so sensitively done) and Molly's breakdown (ditto).  But all 
this did not add up to enough for me.  No, I am not an elitist - I 
love cartoons and comics and a good time. I wouldn't be here if I 
was. I enjoy XMen, but I can hardly say it is great television.  BUt 
I can't shake the idea that Byatt was in some way right - and I have 
to ask if Rowling's world is not about the depth and power behind 
magic and what it brings - what has Rowling to say to me?  And is she 
saying it...

So I want to know what you would say to me. Please leave ad hominum 
arguments at home.  I am well aware I could never write HP.  But it 
isn't my job to create HP.  I am a reader and feel I have full right 
to judge work I could never attempt to write. Afterall I paid for 
OOTP.  I deserve a good novel - the best one Rowling can write IMO.  

Also  What have you to say to those downers who claim (and I am 
becoming one I fear), that other writers are writing far superior 
books?  Have you read them? What do you think about the comparisons 
or comparisons in general.  (Remember I am serious about these 
questions and am not mocking you.  I am one of you - a Potter fan.  
Just of a different stripe....) 

And I would like to know if Potter is the only children's lit you are 
reading.  Or what books you loved as kids. And of course why... 

So what have you to say to my limited Muggle mind.... And remember it 
is all in a good cause.  (Or might be if I get my lazy butt to work 
on this project.)

Thanks for all those who answer,
Golly