Literary value and fan interaction - please help with my research!

[zgirnius]

No: HPFGUIDX 162642

Klotjohan's questions:
 
> 1. What do you think of the Harry Potter books and why? (I realise
> nearly all of the members are likely great fans, but I'm aiming for
> objectivity here. Don't hesitate to offer literary criticism if you 
> have any.)

zgirnius:
I am not a literary critic, just a lifetime voracious reader. I love 
the books for the humorous touches in the invented world, the 
characters, who seem unusually vivid and engaging to me, and the 
stories. One thing that stands out to me compared to some other 
series I have read is the way things hang together, in the sense that 
rereading a book, I tend to catch a lot of things that stand out more 
once I know the ending; and this even extends between books (Book 6 
has materially altered how I think about Book 3, for example).

> 2. How would you say the series compare to similar books in the 
genre
> (e.g. works by J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Natalie Babbitt, Diana 
Wynne
> Jones, Philip Pullman, Roald Dahl etc.) on a literary level?

zgirnius:
I would pull Tolkien out of that list as different, and superior, to 
the others on the list that I am familiar with. I think Rowling's 
work seems as good to me as Lewis's, Jones's, and Dahl's, to the 
extent that I have read them. On a non-literary level, I prefer her 
to all the above except Tolkien.

Tolkien's work, with its invented world (including millenia-long 
history and languages, plural (!) ) is something unique in my 
experience.
 
> 3. Do you have any experience, personal or otherwise, of interaction
> with J.K. Rowling? If so, what was the nature of the interaction?

zgirnius:
No.

> 4. Have you had any indications that Rowling changed something in 
her
> books because of outside influence? If so, what kind of influence 
and by
> whom?

zgirnius:
I doubt she has made major changes to the books based on outside 
influences. However, I think, for example, the particular way she 
shows the uselessness of the Minitry in combating Death Eaters in 
Book 6 is different than it would have been in an alternate reality 
in which the events of 9/11 never happened.

>klotjohan:
> Most of you have
> probably encountered some form of criticism against Rowling and/or 
her
> books, more or less constructive and sensible. I've recently read 
parts
> of a book by Jack Zipes (Sticks and Stones: The Troublesome Success 
of
> Children's Literature from Slovenly Peter to Harry Potter) where he
> argues that children's literature represents one of the most 
significant
> sources of commercial homogenization. He has some strong points 
though I
> sometimes feel that he's too broad in his statements; what 
interests me
> is his labeling of the Harry Potter series as sexist, conventional, 
and
> too mainstream. 

zgirnius:
I think that, if one were to adopt as a goal the utter homegenization 
of children's literature, then the way to do it would be to mandate 
that in every work, there be an equal number of important male and 
female characters, split evenly among the good and evil characters; 
that these characters further be of various ages, and that they 
represent the ethnic and racial compositions of the authors' home 
countries. I think I have left out some categories that ought to be 
included, but you get the picture, I am sure.

I think TV is the big course of commercial homgenization, anyway, not 
children's literature. And if he wants to pick on children's books 
for this reason, he ought to pick on Goosebumps and its ilk.

Rowling chose to write a series about a boy hero, not a girl heroine. 
I'm afraid I am one of the hordes of female readers that have no 
trouble enjoying the adventures of, a male character. I think, if I 
read his book, I would probably disagree with his views on Hermione. 
Yes, she is a helper. So is Ron. It's not a gender thing, it is 
because she is a friend of the hero. 

> klotjohan:
> The stories diverge more from the formula in the
> latest two books as well, interestingly enough; especially 
important is
> the death of major characters at the end(s). So, what I'd like to 
hear
> is what you think of Zipes assessments and also whether you think
> Rowling's less conventional stories (i.e. in OotP and HBP) is an
> improvement or not. 

zgirnius:
What, Cedric doesn't count? I think I would retroactively group GoF 
with the later books, and not the earlier ones, if what makes a 
book 'conventional' is nobody good dying. HBP is my favorite, but I 
also like all of OotP, GoF, and PoA very much as well.