Why Harry Potter??

[enchantedfire5]

Why is Harry Potter so popular? I just don't understand!! I am not at all knocking Harry Potter or J.K. Rowling, God bless her. But I can't BELIEVE how popular her books are. I liked the first two movies, but couldn't get past the first book. For me it was boring, and emotionless. But that's my humble opinon.

Harry Potter seems to be the most popular series I've ever heard of and I can't figure out why!! LOL> :)

[Azraelsbane]

luck of the... Scottish? I don't know. It's not a bad series by any means, but my fag book was #3, and then I didnt really like one till 6. I can understand people who are boggled by the fact that its so huge, but advertising works, what can I say? :)

[enchantedfire5]

Is it true she was living in her car for a time before she got published? Or is that just B.S.?

[Will Lavender]

I held out for years before reading one. On a whim, I bought the first one two months ago in a used bookstore.

Loved it. Saw immediately why it had caught on like it has. It's the same as hundreds of other fantasy books I've read. But it's also different.

This is why, in my opinion, it's become such a raging success. Same, but different. Same hero-who-doesn't-want-the-mantle formula, same type of nerdish, ostracized main character, same outsider-against-the-odds theme, same mix of magic and lore and mythology that you see in tons of other fantasy series.

But there's something fiercely unique about it. I finished it feeling as if I'd never really read anything quite like it.

That said, I haven't read past book one. I would rather read books for adults.

[rugcat]

I liked the first two movies, but couldn't get past the first book. For me it was boring, and emotionless. But that's my humble opinon.You are aware it was aimed at 10-12 year olds?

If there was anyone who really understood how a cultural phenomenon develops and what the elements of one are, they'd be richer than J.K.

[kristie911]

You could say that about almost every popular thing out there. Why Pokemon? Why Dora the Explorer? Why Harry Potter ? Why? Why? Why?

Who knows? Some things work, some don't.

I don't know what about Harry Potter is different but like Will said, it's just different. :shrug: I don't think there is an explanation.

[black ink]

I started book one a few times before I got into it. Like you, I found it boring and a bit slow. When the buzz became more fierce, I decided to push through and read it no matter what. After first few chapters, I finally got why people (especially kids) loved it. No, the writing isn't amazing, but the story is so fun and engaging. I'm a former English teacher and I think HP is phenomenal because it got kids reading again, especially boys who've tended to be reluctant readers.

[Will Lavender]

You could say that about almost every popular thing out there. Why Pokemon? Why Dora the Explorer? Why Harry Potter ? Why? Why? Why?

Who knows? Some things work, some don't.

I don't know what about Harry Potter is different but like Will said, it's just different. :shrug: I don't think there is an explanation.

Along these lines, I'm reading Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point, which explores why certain things catch on--or "tip" in Gladwell's language--in our culture. Fascinating book.

[DeadlyAccurate]

That said, I haven't read past book one. I would rather read books for adults.

The first one, and to a lesser extent, the second one, are the only ones that read like children's literature. After that, the writing sounds just like any adult-oriented fantasy.

If anyone truly understood the why of it, they'd be able to figure out how to take advantage of it. No one really knows. I've read many books that are better written, though these are great books. But I haven't read many that have sucked me in quite so thoroughly. I don't sit around discussing character motivations, meanings, or plot points and questions for other series (except Buffy; I can talk Buffy all day long); but I've been involved in very long threads on HP.

[enchantedfire5]

I held out for years before reading one. On a whim, I bought the first one two months ago in a used bookstore.

Loved it. Saw immediately why it had caught on like it has. It's the same as hundreds of other fantasy books I've read. But it's also different.

This is why, in my opinion, it's become such a raging success. Same, but different. Same hero-who-doesn't-want-the-mantle formula, same type of nerdish, ostracized main character, same outsider-against-the-odds theme, same mix of magic and lore and mythology that you see in tons of other fantasy series.

But there's something fiercely unique about it. I finished it feeling as if I'd never really read anything quite like it.

That said, I haven't read past book one. I would rather read books for adults.

Good point. I don't know, I guess to each his own. Perhaps I should try to get through the first five chapters this time and keep going. But there was something else about HP that stopped me, it just felt emotionless, without meaning. I guess I'm too much into Tolkien. Well what the heck, I do like Eragon lol, and I know many writers who hate that book. Yet I thought it was great. I also like alot of physical fighting, magic battle. Perhaps this comes from my love of animation, DBZ hehe.

Sorry, I went off on a whimm :)

[johnzakour]

I just think she was at the right place at the right time with the right product.

I don't know if 50 years from now people will be looking that same way at HP like they do LOTRs, but no matter what I give her kudos for what she's done in the here and now.

[Southern_girl29]

I can't answer for anyone else, but for me, her writing takes me back in time to when I was a child, when I would open a book and be lost in a world of make belief. I wouldn't be aware of anything going on around me. Since I've been an adult, not too many books have done that for me. I still love to read but a lot of times every day worries creep into my mind while I'm reading. The Harry Potter books don't allow that to happen. I'm too involved in the story.

[JBI]

Antonio Salieri was more popular than Mozart in his time, regarded as one of the best Opera Composers.

Unfortunately however, no one really listens to his music anymore, yet there isn't a child in the western world who doesn't know at least one Mozart piece (ABCs for example).


Perhaps the root of the Potter craze is the serialization of it. The books are subject to anticipation, simply because one has no idea how it will end. Whereas once someone has finished the book, if they are pleased, and it ends happily ever after, the characters still die when you finish. If it ends sadly, the characters die as well.

The mark of a true piece of art is its ability to stay alive over time. Though some books are very popular in contemporary markets, they perhaps will never be picked up after the death of the author, or the hype disappears. I sincerely doubt that people will be reading Grisham or Brown in the future. That being said, those writers still win in the end, their bank accounts prove that, but perhaps they win money, whereas the real novelist wins recognition over time.

[Danger Jane]

Along these lines, I'm reading Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point, which explores why certain things catch on--or "tip" in Gladwell's language--in our culture. Fascinating book.

Definitely fascinating. I read it a few months ago and will probably reread it in a few more months...and following Gladwell's logic, most likely, a highly influential group of people latched on to HP early on, and through a complicated network of experts (he called them mavens) and connectors (people who know everyone), it spread. And like JBI said, I think the serialization, the anticipation, has a lot to do with it.

I doubt JK Rowling wrote HP intending the cutural phenomenon of today. I thinks she wrote the best story she could and got lucky as hell. Because there are similar books, just as fun, better written, that have stuck around but have no name recognition anywhere close to HP.

[arainsb123]

"Boring" ...

Not going to touch this with a ten-foot poker.

[Chasing the Horizon]

Funny that this thread should come up now, because I just bought the first HP book today. (Yeah, I know, I'm a little late for the party, lol) I never read any before because I have zero interest in YA. I finally decided a few weeks ago that I should probably at least take a look at it, since it's the best selling fantasy of modern times and I write fantasy (not YA, but still). I mean, SOMETHING in those books is appealing to a huge number of people, many of whom are adults.

Today I picked up a copy of the first book at a yard sale for fifty cents (hey, it's YA, I'm not paying $8 for something I've never in my life enjoyed reading). Now I see this thread and just noticed the book somehow got tossed on my bed. Starting to feel like there's a conspiracy to make me read this thing. :D

I guess I'll have an actual opinion on this topic tomorrow.

[Cassie]

This Harry Potter thing is just amazing. I haven't read any of the books, haven't seen any of the movies. Now I hear there's going to be a Harry Potter amusement park in Florida!!

Some commentators on the news today said that the Harry Potter series and JK Rowling will go down in history - kind of like some of the classic tales .....

Meanwhile, Taylor Hicks has recently released his book, "Heart Full of Soul."

[Niteowl]

I read the first two books. Which is a rule I like to follow, reading at least two books of hugely successful writers. I have a few opinions as to why HP is so dang successful, in tidy, if boring, bullet points:

-it takes place in a school, what kid can't relate to that? The endless efforts to fit in, the oddness of the whole thing.

-the pace moves along at quite a pace. She never gets bogged down on details. She seems to be a firm believer that a book is a joint effort, between her and reader. A few salient details, ok, done, keep moving the plot. I was flabbergasted when I read how short her description of Hogwart's was.

-the characters are the sorts of people that every kid knows about. The bully, the entitled rich kid, the smarty pants, the odd bloke who tries his best.

-magic. Magic is dang cool.

-no reinventing the wheel. She has wizards, she has witches, people fly on brooms. Many of the elements she uses are well worn and familiar. Adds to the quick uptake of the world.

At least, that's my 2 cents. I quite enjoyed the books, I think she's a great writer. Well, not Great, but you know, great.

[underthecity]

I also only read the first two, and agree with the other posters.

But here's my extra two cents:

The first one was a LOT more whimsical and fun than most of the rest of the series, which I think is what hooked a lot of readers. But I think it was the overall concept that did it: the outcast-kid with horrible foster parents who suddenly gets invited to attend a wizard boarding school. So, the MC now gets to attend the boarding school of everyone's dreams, set in a far-off mystical land and populated with a menagerie of unusual characters with unusual names. While he's there he meets cool new friends and gets to work magic with a magic wand, fly a broomstick, and see all kinds of crazy neat things at a totally cool castle called Hogwarts.

Who wouldn't want to experience that? Kids and adults alike.

allen

[enchantedfire5]

This Harry Potter thing is just amazing. I haven't read any of the books, haven't seen any of the movies. Now I hear there's going to be a Harry Potter amusement park in Florida!!

Some commentators on the news today said that the Harry Potter series and JK Rowling will go down in history - kind of like some of the classic tales .....

Meanwhile, Taylor Hicks has recently released his book, "Heart Full of Soul."

Wow, I am just blown away by this. It's so strang how HP is just so dam popular, stranger than anything I've ever heard of. I guess I'll have to try and get through the first one again.

[PhatDad]

I personally found that the books got better and better. I've only read up to book four of the series but it was a lot better than the previous books. If you are struggling with the first then I'd suggest skimming it and getting on with the next ones in the series.

[enchantedfire5]

I respect J.K. Rowling for her work, wow, what a dream come true. God bless her. But as I thought more and more about it I think the reason why I can't get into it is because it feels empty. Anotherwords, there's no spiritual essense involving Good, or God you might say. Or even an essense called the "Light" or something. Or is there? From what I got there wasn't. And that's perfectly fine, to each his own, but I fall in love with things like LOTR, CS.Lewis' works, and Madeline Howard's "The Hidden Stars" where the wizards pray and a force known as "The Fates" govern the world, and there is a sidde called "The Light." I guess it just feels more alive with passion or rightousness. At least for me.

I know others will disagree and that's fine, so please no one attack me. I just gave my opinon. :)

[ccarver30]

I don't get it either, but I am super hella jealous.

[OddButInteresting]

That said, I haven't read past book one. I would rather read books for adults.

You took the words right out of my mouth, there.

In the run-up to the release of The Deathly Hallows (today, as it happens!) I tried to get back into the series. Four years ago I read all the way up to about half way through Goblet of Fire. I wasn't bored, but I found myself getting distracted by other things. Chiefly, exams. I didn't pick it back up again.

Reading The Philosopher's ("Sorcerer" in the States) Stone is proving quite a challenge for me at 20. Not because its concepts are too deep and its prose is too flowery, but because it's exactly the opposite.

Personally, I HATE flowery prose. For me, an author should tell me where I am, who is there, and what is going on right off the bat. Not necessarily in the first sentence or even paragraph, but I need to be grounded firmly in the book's universe. Rowling wastes no time and gets right to the point. No problem there. Her writing is both articulate and light at the same time. For me, it works. No qualms with the writing at all.

The concepts, whilst derived from a number of sources, are drawn together in an original and interesting way. As someone stated earlier in the thread, she tells the same story as always, but presents it in a way that is wholly fresh and unique to her universe. Each book begins by placing its key players in a difficult situation (someone is trying to steal what lies under the guarded trapdoor, a creature is prowling the school's corridors and petrifying the students, or a high security Prisoner is on the run and he's hunting Harry down); this situation is then explored during the mid-section of the book, and is always resolved by its conclusion. Beginning, Middle, and End. The classic structure. It allows each book to stand on its own two feet, but in the context of a greater continuity (a structure of seven individual parts). Her structuring is fantastic, and any loose ends she leaves at the end of each book are fairly minor on the list of concerns as the reader's primary focus has been the individual story arc of that specific installment.

However, the first two books were written primarily for children. They read like they were written for children. Rowling skips over a number of things that she could have explored in greater detail. Not necessarily by stringing together a number of circumlocutions ripped straight out of the theasaurus. Just little indications of how certain things affect certain characters. Hermione talking to herself in the toilet before the troll attacks would have been welcome, but its absence doesn't hinder the story. I don't blame Rowling at all, as she sticks with the central story and very rarely deviates from it. It remains focused, and manages to keep on the rails. But, as a matter of personal taste (and possibly testament to my maturity as a reader) I prefer a little more depth to add that extra dimension and perspective.

I saw Order of The Phoenix a week ago, and it has inspired me to plough through the early books just so I can get to the nitty gritty. What really appealed to me with the film was the focus on the politics of the Wizard World, and how key figures are always trying to upstage one another in the pursuit of greater authority. But, as is the case in our own reality, they each have their own methods of achieving their goals.

I apologise for ranting on a bit there. When I get the ball rolling I really can't help myself.

[shadowdragon]

One thing I think that really drove it to the forefront in the US(at least here in the middle of the country)is the way it was handled. Around here, schools were banning it, libraries were refusing to carry it and every other church was preaching against it. All because it has witch craft in it. A million other books have too, but this was really the first aimed at children and you would have thought that J.K. Rowling was the anti-christ come to snatch children in the night. Well as Rowling herself pointed out in one of her later books, the quickest way to make somthing popular among kids and to make sure they read it, is for adults to tell them that they can't.

So because parents,teachers and religious leaders were in such a snit about it, the kids got the books and read them. I knew a lady at work who let her kids' friends hide their HP books at her house so parents wouldn't know the kids had them.

Once the kids opened the book, they found a young boy (right about most of the young readers ages) who suffered alot of the same problems that they too faced in school. But unlike themselves, Harry got to leave and go to a cool school and learn magic. Yes he had problems there too, but he also had a great adventure, made loyal friends, and got to fly through the air on a broom stick in a cool sport where he got to be the one who won the game.

As those same first readers of the book grew and matured, the books did too. So that as the readers began dealing with becoming teenagers and dealing with the hormones that came with it, so did Harry and his friends. The books became more detailed and darker and Harry's adventures started to be more complicated.

I never paid much attention to it, until all of the uproar about it. When I did read it, I liked it. But then I tend to enjoy just about any fantasy book that has pages and words.

[shadowdragon]

I should amend that, I don't like every fantasy (there have been quite a few that I have been thoroughly disgusted with) but HP was a cute story. At first you just have to remember that you are reading on a 12 year old level.

[enchantedfire5]

One thing I think that really drove it to the forefront in the US(at least here in the middle of the country)is the way it was handled. Around here, schools were banning it, libraries were refusing to carry it and every other church was preaching against it. All because it has witch craft in it. A million other books have too, but this was really the first aimed at children and you would have thought that J.K. Rowling was the anti-christ come to snatch children in the night. Well as Rowling herself pointed out in one of her later books, the quickest way to make somthing popular among kids and to make sure they read it, is for adults to tell them that they can't.

So because parents,teachers and religious leaders were in such a snit about it, the kids got the books and read them. I knew a lady at work who let her kids' friends hide their HP books at her house so parents wouldn't know the kids had them.

Once the kids opened the book, they found a young boy (right about most of the young readers ages) who suffered alot of the same problems that they too faced in school. But unlike themselves, Harry got to leave and go to a cool school and learn magic. Yes he had problems there too, but he also had a great adventure, made loyal friends, and got to fly through the air on a broom stick in a cool sport where he got to be the one who won the game.

As those same first readers of the book grew and matured, the books did too. So that as the readers began dealing with becoming teenagers and dealing with the hormones that came with it, so did Harry and his friends. The books became more detailed and darker and Harry's adventures started to be more complicated.

I never paid much attention to it, until all of the uproar about it. When I did read it, I liked it. But then I tend to enjoy just about any fantasy book that has pages and words.

You make some very good points. Though not all Christians were against it, I'm a Catholic Christian and I have never had a problem with it. Ha, my wife's late grand mother was an old fashioned strict devout Catholic and she LOVED the HP book. It makes me mad and depressed when so many fanatic people begin an uproar for something they don't understand. In the world of HP, there is GOOD magic and BAD magic. Good vs. evil. The good magic doesn't come from the devil as most christians would believe, that's because it's a friggen FANTASY, nothing more, nothing less!

To be fair, christains are attacked as well by others not understanding them, and that goes for every group of human beings who are "different" to another. Mankind fears what they don't understand.

[shadowdragon]

Oh I wasn't meaning to put a bad light on anybody. I was just saying what got kids around here riled up. Parents in general were at first upset. It was going to teach their kid spells. I had to snicker at that. That is like saying saying Hocus Pocus is going to make a rabbit appear.

*why is there a rabbit running around my house now?*:D

[enchantedfire5]

Oh I wasn't meaning to put a bad light on anybody. I was just saying what got kids around here riled up. Parents in general were at first upset. It was going to teach their kid spells. I had to snicker at that. That is like saying saying Hocus Pocus is going to make a rabbit appear.

*why is there a rabbit running around my house now?*:D

LOL! :)

[Azure Skye]

I can't answer for anyone else, but for me, her writing takes me back in time to when I was a child, when I would open a book and be lost in a world of make belief. I wouldn't be aware of anything going on around me. Since I've been an adult, not too many books have done that for me. I still love to read but a lot of times every day worries creep into my mind while I'm reading. The Harry Potter books don't allow that to happen. I'm too involved in the story.


My thoughts exactly.

[ClaudiaGray]

I've really enjoyed the series throughout, and I think I do see why it's so popular. It's not one thing you can lay your finger on, but after I read the first three books (which I read one, two, three in the space of about two weeks), I was itching to get my hands on the next. The first was cute, but definitely for children -- but I didn't see a couple of the twists, and that was what intrigued me enough to pick up the second. The second was better, and it had matured just a little bit (like the students) into something that hinted at real darkness and danger beyond the cozy school story. That got me to pick up the third. And the third was the one where you started having adult characters, backstories, and a hint of the larger scale of the story. All this mixed with humor, action and a very fully imagined world: That's good stuff. Very few books (for adults or children) deliver so well.

JKR's prose stylings are unremarkable, and at times her plotting gets both convoluted and holey. But she's got tremendous wit, real emotion and respect for her characters, and that wins every time.

[JimmyB27]

What I just don't get is the whole mania thing. People queuing up at midnight to be among the first to get their hands on a copy of the latest book.
I'm not the biggest fan of Potter anyway, I read the first few, but thought they were merely mediocre books written for kids. But my point here is that I still wouldn't understand the way people have to read it *right away*, even if it was a Pratchett or a Banks book (two of my favourite authors).
There's plenty of other awesome books to read in the meantime. It's not like they're going to run out of copies and just go 'oh well, that's it. If you didn't get one, tough'.

[enchantedfire5]

I was in a book store a little while ago and was breezing through "Deathly Hallows" hehe. But the lady there said I was cheating. I said I didn't really think I would read it anyway. But then again, why did I pick it up? LOL.

[black ink]

What I just don't get is the whole mania thing. People queuing up at midnight to be among the first to get their hands on a copy of the latest book.
I'm not the biggest fan of Potter anyway, I read the first few, but thought they were merely mediocre books written for kids. But my point here is that I still wouldn't understand the way people have to read it *right away*, even if it was a Pratchett or a Banks book (two of my favourite authors).
There's plenty of other awesome books to read in the meantime. It's not like they're going to run out of copies and just go 'oh well, that's it. If you didn't get one, tough'.

Why do people line up hours in advance to watch a movie on opening night? I think part of it is a perceived community that some feel being a part of HP's world, and not a little advertising hype. Look at JK Rowling's website--it's definitely intended to make readers feel like they're part of her inner circle.

[Dancre]

Why is Harry Potter so popular? I just don't understand!! I am not at all knocking Harry Potter or J.K. Rowling, God bless her. But I can't BELIEVE how popular her books are. I liked the first two movies, but couldn't get past the first book. For me it was boring, and emotionless. But that's my humble opinon.

Harry Potter seems to be the most popular series I've ever heard of and I can't figure out why!! LOL> :)

I've been asking the HP fans at work the same question. And I get the same answer each time: I love her imagination!! I think that's the key, her imagination. Look at the stories. They have great plots with lots of twists and turns with interesting characters, interesting scenes, interesting backgrounds. I think writers have lost that imagination and instead try to tricks and gimmicks to catch the reader's attention. Just use that God-given imagination and see what happens.

kim

[JimmyB27]

Why do people line up hours in advance to watch a movie on opening night?

They do indeed, and I don't get that either. I don't get why people lined up for the PS3, or the iPhone either.

I think part of it is a perceived community that some feel being a part of HP's world, and not a little advertising hype. Look at JK Rowling's website--it's definitely intended to make readers feel like they're part of her inner circle.


Sounds about right. Still seems odd to me.

[MasterRegal]

The way I see it is that there was a story and world that children loved. That is what drove the success. Rowling's writing is another matter, it is mediocre by far, but her story telling is great.

[Hillgate]

Great story - very high concept - vaguely believable in an unbelievable way - extremely likeable and well-rounded characters. I think the films are in general better than the books. Whatever you think of JK Rowling, there's a touch of genius there...

[enchantedfire5]

I guess I should try reading them then. Dam, everyone seems to love them but me, hehe.

[misslissy]

I respect J.K. Rowling for her work, wow, what a dream come true. God bless her. But as I thought more and more about it I think the reason why I can't get into it is because it feels empty. Anotherwords, there's no spiritual essense involving Good, or God you might say. Or even an essense called the "Light" or something. Or is there? From what I got there wasn't. And that's perfectly fine, to each his own, but I fall in love with things like LOTR, CS.Lewis' works, and Madeline Howard's "The Hidden Stars" where the wizards pray and a force known as "The Fates" govern the world, and there is a sidde called "The Light." I guess it just feels more alive with passion or rightousness. At least for me.

I know others will disagree and that's fine, so please no one attack me. I just gave my opinon.
Okay, before I state this, I just would like you to know that it's not an attack, I'm just trying to . . .show something that there is? As far as there not being a god or a spiritual good, there is. If you look at it, the books are clearly divided into two sides Harry vs. Voldemort. At the end of the first book, you learn that Harry has this weapon of sorts that Voldemort doesn't have, that he knows love. This love seperates them through the entire series, right up to the very end. I think that that could be your spiritual good you're looking for, even if not straight up front there. I tried to explain that as easily as I could without giving away too much.


People queuing up at midnight to be among the first to get their hands on a copy of the latest book.
All I can say is it's the experience. There's nothing like it and when you've been waiting so long for the answers to everything - every question you've ever had, every theory you've ever discussed, every character you wonder if they'll be alive in the end - you almost feel obliged to know what happens right away. That and the spoilers are horrendous if you don't read it right away. People love to ruin this book for other people. It was actually leaked - the entire thing this time. There's also the element of being there with other fans, of feeling like you're part of something bigger than you. You get to meet all sorts of cool and interesting people that you may have never had the chance to meet before and discuss opinions and life and things in general. And personally, I love meeting more people.

[Jamesaritchie]

Why is Harry Potter so popular? I just don't understand!! I am not at all knocking Harry Potter or J.K. Rowling, God bless her. But I can't BELIEVE how popular her books are. I liked the first two movies, but couldn't get past the first book. For me it was boring, and emotionless. But that's my humble opinon.

Harry Potter seems to be the most popular series I've ever heard of and I can't figure out why!! LOL> :)

I don't know why, either, but I love the books. I picked up the first one because my youngest child wanted to read it, and I couldn't put it down. It's been the same with the others.

Sometimes things just are, and figuring out exactly why is impossible. I can only say the books have fascinated me, I love them, and I don't even know why.

[Jamesaritchie]

One thing I think that really drove it to the forefront in the US(at least here in the middle of the country)is the way it was handled. Around here, schools were banning it, libraries were refusing to carry it and every other church was preaching against it. All because it has witch craft in it. A million other books have too, but this was really the first aimed at children and you would have thought that J.K. Rowling was the anti-christ come to snatch children in the night. Well as Rowling herself pointed out in one of her later books, the quickest way to make somthing popular among kids and to make sure they read it, is for adults to tell them that they can't.

So because parents,teachers and religious leaders were in such a snit about it, the kids got the books and read them. I knew a lady at work who let her kids' friends hide their HP books at her house so parents wouldn't know the kids had them.

Once the kids opened the book, they found a young boy (right about most of the young readers ages) who suffered alot of the same problems that they too faced in school. But unlike themselves, Harry got to leave and go to a cool school and learn magic. Yes he had problems there too, but he also had a great adventure, made loyal friends, and got to fly through the air on a broom stick in a cool sport where he got to be the one who won the game.

As those same first readers of the book grew and matured, the books did too. So that as the readers began dealing with becoming teenagers and dealing with the hormones that came with it, so did Harry and his friends. The books became more detailed and darker and Harry's adventures started to be more complicated.

I never paid much attention to it, until all of the uproar about it. When I did read it, I liked it. But then I tend to enjoy just about any fantasy book that has pages and words.

I don't think Harry Potter fell into trouble with Christians until after it was hugely popular. Certainly not in my part of the country. The books were selling like mad around here, everyone wanted to read them, and then the Christian backlash started. I think the Christian backlash came because the books were wildly popular, not the other way around. This was definitely the case around here.

And right from the start, the mania for Harry Potter was at least as strong with adults as with kids. I know far more adults than kids who are mad for Harry Potter. I'm one of them. Of my three kids, only one is a harry Potter fan, but my wife loves the books, and so do I.

[Provrb1810meggy]

I just read a quote somewhere from J.K that she is a Christian, which makes me laugh, since many fanatical Christian groups seem to hate her so.

[maestrowork]

The whole Magical School thing is brilliant -- everything else is kind of derivative, but the "school" stuff is what really sets her series apart, and every child (or adults) can relate to that. She gets the British boarding school thing down pat and that's a lot of fun.

Part of it is the imagination -- she combined a lot classic stuff and it's just fun. On top of it, I think there's something about the simplicity, the good vs. evil thing that is so clear-cut that it's highly identifiable. Adults might find that a bit childish (OK, so the Gryffindors are good kids and heroes -- who doesn't want to be the lion -- and the Slytherins are the bad kids). Easy to digest.

I stopped at book 2 because I thought it was a bit juvenile. Clearly she wrote for kids and young adults. But from what I've heard, the later books are much darker, complex and layered.

[kristie911]

Clearly she wrote for kids and young adults. But from what I've heard, the later books are much darker, complex and layered.

I think as you read the books...especially if you read them back to back, you really see her grow as a writer. I'm guessing as the series got more popular, either she realized the need or her editors/publisher pushed her to gear her writing a little more towards adults but still for kids. You can see the layers so much more in her later writing.

[Alexandra Little]

The banning of it definitely helped (even I'm like: "they banned it? I wanna buy it"), but it's a combination of the right elements at the right time. If the first book had been published ten years earlier or later, it might not have taken off because readers' tastes would have changed.

Yes there are a lot of same elements as other fantasies, but nothing has been done quite the same way--including the magical schools, the dark lords, the bullies, the sidekicks, etc.

And now that I've finished the seventh book (yes, I went to the midnight release and stayed up all night to finish it), I cannot think of a single children's book (or any other age group book, with possibly the exception of LotR) that has so many characters that maintain their character consistency and yet manage to surprise you without it seeming like they are acting out of character.

Without spoiling the seventh book, I can say that I have never been both so surprised and yet not disappointed by the way the characters acted, or have seen their motivations changed. I have never read anything quite like this and, even though Rowling reads like Tolkien in some parts you want to snooze through, I cannot imagine a book or books coming along that will get this deep in its depth.

I hope that made sense--I'm still really tired (not only did I stay up to read the book, I also stayed up with a concussion, which on hindsight was probably not a good idea).

[JBI]

:p want to know what's funny? It's threads like these that make the series popular.

Originally, the series was marketed at children, but due to positive reviews, not to mention tons of advertising from children who read the book, the series took off (though at this point I still imagine it was children, not adults, who were reading it). As the story progressed however, we see that more adults started reading it. The question of course is: Why? The answer is quite simple really; curiosity. If the kids love it so much, there must be something about it. So the parents pick it up, some like it, some loathe it, but the chain continues.

Just think how often you see threads popping up here. This is just one board; I am sure threads have surfaced on almost every literary board, not to mention the fact that even the literati university professors have tried to analyze the success. The success of course, is driven by the desire to understand the success. Everyone wants to know why, and the answer really is, (in my opinion) that people can't understand why it is so popular. She has some aesthetic merit, I won't lie, but personally in a literary sense I loathe her style and characterization (I read up to the third one when I was 11 I think, then read the fourth when I was 14 and quit half way through).

[JBI]

The banning of it definitely helped (even I'm like: "they banned it? I wanna buy it"), but it's a combination of the right elements at the right time. If the first book had been published ten years earlier or later, it might not have taken off because readers' tastes would have changed.

Yes there are a lot of same elements as other fantasies, but nothing has been done quite the same way--including the magical schools, the dark lords, the bullies, the sidekicks, etc.

And now that I've finished the seventh book (yes, I went to the midnight release and stayed up all night to finish it), I cannot think of a single children's book (or any other age group book, with possibly the exception of LotR) that has so many characters that maintain their character consistency and yet manage to surprise you without it seeming like they are acting out of character.

Without spoiling the seventh book, I can say that I have never been both so surprised and yet not disappointed by the way the characters acted, or have seen their motivations changed. I have never read anything quite like this and, even though Rowling reads like Tolkien in some parts you want to snooze through, I cannot imagine a book or books coming along that will get this deep in its depth.

I hope that made sense--I'm still really tired (not only did I stay up to read the book, I also stayed up with a concussion, which on hindsight was probably not a good idea).

Really; I think her characters are flat. Personally, being somewhat of an age with Harry, I consider his actions most closely resembling an insecure girl, rather than an adolescent boy. Perhaps it's the English influence, though I doubt a guy in England would take the long way home, simply because he enjoyed the way the lights lit up the street.

[Alexandra Little]

Really; I think her characters are flat. Personally, being somewhat of an age with Harry, I consider his actions most closely resembling an insecure girl, rather than an adolescent boy. Perhaps it's the English influence, though I doubt a guy in England would take the long way home, simply because he enjoyed the way the lights lit up the street.

I did read somewhere (though I forget where), where a businessman preferred working with Englishmen because American men are so dominant, and with Englishmen they could actually get two words in.

And I don't think her characters are flat--especially a few characters I could name, but then I would be spoiling the seventh book if I were to name a few. Some of them were really surprising for their actions, but definitely not flat in my opinion and not out of character either.

[Christine N.]

Actually, Maestro, the wizard kids at school is the LEAST original aspect. Jane Yolen wrote Wizard's Hall YEARS ago (and was subsequently accused of stealing the idea, even though the copyright date blatantly proves otherwise)

Diane Duane has been writing these types of books- wizard kids in magical schools, for over TWENTY FIVE years now. Go to Amazon and look up the Young Wizards series, I think it's called.

It's not the school thing.

I wrote an article on this very thing...posted on Beyond the Veil (http://paranormalauthors.blogspot.com). It's my own opinion as to why the series is so popular.

[TrainofThought]

Why is Harry Potter so popular? I just don't understand!! I am not at all knocking Harry Potter or J.K. Rowling, God bless her. But I can't BELIEVE how popular her books are. I liked the first two movies, but couldn't get past the first book. For me it was boring, and emotionless. But that's my humble opinon.

Harry Potter seems to be the most popular series I've ever heard of and I can't figure out why!! LOL> :)I’m a firm believer in timing. If Harry Potter came out in the 50s or 60s, it might not have taken off as it did. Back then, children used their own imagination and parents did not stand in line or fight over books/gifts for their children. At least my mom said she never did. :Shrug:

Adults enjoy the series as much as children do if not more. I think parents promote HP books because they enjoy the child-boy wonder and fantasy world of Harry. He’s the Peter Pan of the 90’s and millennium. :D Just my two cents.

[Jamesaritchie]

I’m a firm believer in timing. If Harry Potter came out in the 50s or 60s, it might not have taken off as it did. Back then, children used their own imagination and parents did not stand in line or fight over books/gifts for their children. At least my mom said she never did. :Shrug:

Adults enjoy the series as much as children do if not more. I think parents promote HP books because they enjoy the child-boy wonder and fantasy world of Harry. He’s the Peter Pan of the 90’s and millennium. :D Just my two cents.

I'm not sure this rings true. Children's books were huge back in the fifties, and a heck of a lot more parents bought books for their kids. I don't know if any parents fought over books back then, but they sure bought an awful lot of books for their kids to read. Now they buy all sorts of toys and gizmos and gadgets instead of books.

Reading a book IS using your imagination, and the number one complaint many have about kids today is that they don't use their imagination, and specifically by not reading books, not that they do.

[infinitus_kaze]

In my opinion it is story and plot. The story is what makes it popular among children and adults. It takes normal fantasy elements, blends in aspects of the real world, and also gives us unique takes of other aspects. I didn't want to read the series at first, but my niece talked me into it and now I'm hooked. I've read the series about 7 times and I stayed up for 24 hours straight just so that I could finish the novel as soon as possible (which I was in line to buy at 12:01 A.M., July 21st).

[johnnysannie]

I’m a firm believer in timing. If Harry Potter came out in the 50s or 60s, it might not have taken off as it did. Back then, children used their own imagination and parents did not stand in line or fight over books/gifts for their children. At least my mom said she never did. :Shrug:

Adults enjoy the series as much as children do if not more. I think parents promote HP books because they enjoy the child-boy wonder and fantasy world of Harry. He’s the Peter Pan of the 90’s and millennium. :D Just my two cents.


I'm a baby boomer kid so you're talking about the era when i grew up and I have to disagree. There were many kids books and I was always an avid reader. The toys and gadgets were different but there was some - not as great, I'll agree but some - competition for gifts. You could ask my mother who searched all over a large city for a Kenner E-Z Bake Oven for me in about 1963 or so. My dad - a Depression era kid - could tell you about Buck Rogers' toys and stuff or about Red Ryder BB guns. Or my mom - same era - could tell you about all the Roy Rogers toys and such or you could visit the Roy Rogers/Dale Evans Museum now in Branson Missouri and see for yourself.

Imagination works now for kids especially if it is nurtured and it did then. There have been many cultural changes since my childhood but wanting kids to get the latest hot toy or using our imagination hasn't changed all that much.

[TrainofThought]

I'm not sure this rings true. Children's books were huge back in the fifties, and a heck of a lot more parents bought books for their kids. I don't know if any parents fought over books back then, but they sure bought an awful lot of books for their kids to read. Now they buy all sorts of toys and gizmos and gadgets instead of books.

Reading a book IS using your imagination, and the number one complaint many have about kids today is that they don't use their imagination, and specifically by not reading books, not that they do.I never said children’s books weren’t huge in the fifties, BUT even as a young child I don’t remember a children’s book highly wanted by adults. Harry Potter is read by children AND adults. As you state, parents bought books for children, there wasn’t an adult craze for a children’s book. If you can provide me with a children’s line of books where adults sat outside overnight to buy it for them and/or their children, please do so because I would be interested in knowing.

Yes, reading is imagination yet we also pretended outside the reading world, because we didn’t rely on television or electronic gadgets to entertain us. I left this point out figuring everyone knows it.

I'm a baby boomer kid so you're talking about the era when i grew up and I have to disagree. There were many kids books and I was always an avid reader. The toys and gadgets were different but there was some - not as great, I'll agree but some - competition for gifts. You could ask my mother who searched all over a large city for a Kenner E-Z Bake Oven for me in about 1963 or so. My dad - a Depression era kid - could tell you about Buck Rogers' toys and stuff or about Red Ryder BB guns. Or my mom - same era - could tell you about all the Roy Rogers toys and such or you could visit the Roy Rogers/Dale Evans Museum now in Branson Missouri and see for yourself.

Imagination works now for kids especially if it is nurtured and it did then. There have been many cultural changes since my childhood but wanting kids to get the latest hot toy or using our imagination hasn't changed all that much.When I was young I read, but wasn't an avid reader and neither were the neighborhood children. I will alter my response in saying it was an individual decision regarding parents searching high and low for a toy for their child. YOUR parents may have searched all over town for gifts for you, but MY mom, aunt and neighbors did not go to that extent. If E-Z Bake oven wasn’t within reach, we didn’t get it - plain and simple.

I’ll agree to disagree with you. In my area and in society as a whole, the extent parents went to in getting their child the latest hot toy or wanting them to use their imagination has changed a lot. Nowadays, parents will sit out all night to make sure they get PS2 station, Harry Potter book (party), etc. I'm not saying your mother isn't right ;) it's just that I'm going off what my mother has told me and she says she knows everything. :D

[The Grump]

My favorites are the last three books.

Having said that, the fact I was able to stay up until 3:30 in the morning to finish #7 says a lot for why the books are popular. I didn't put it aside because getting some sleep felt a better use of my time. Believe me I have at least three books by best-selling authors sitting in my pile in various stages of completion.

As for why lightening hit Rowling's effort, I think I lot has to do with the sly sense of humor that lurks behind the scenes. Granted there are hundreds (thousands) of books about kids going away to school to encounter bullies, the Potter series stands out because of its structure. As someone said above, the books have a beginning, a middle filled with complications, and a resolution that is satisfying yet open ended. Even book #7 is open ended in a way.

[enchantedfire5]

I’m a firm believer in timing. If Harry Potter came out in the 50s or 60s, it might not have taken off as it did. Back then, children used their own imagination and parents did not stand in line or fight over books/gifts for their children. At least my mom said she never did. :Shrug:

Adults enjoy the series as much as children do if not more. I think parents promote HP books because they enjoy the child-boy wonder and fantasy world of Harry. He’s the Peter Pan of the 90’s and millennium. :D Just my two cents.

TrainofThought, wow, your icon is . . . well very attractive Lol :)

[EriRae]

I feel robbed. 8 hours, and it's over. I spend $20 on 8 hours of entertainment that weren't all that entertaining and no future books...ROBBED.

But I think I wanted to hate this one because it's the end. I didn't think it was as tight as the others. :( Less "magic" for me.

But I can't seem to write a good first chapter, so what do I know?

[Shadow_Ferret]

I held out for years before reading one. On a whim, I bought the first one two months ago in a used bookstore.

Loved it. Saw immediately why it had caught on like it has. It's the same as hundreds of other fantasy books I've read. But it's also different.

This is why, in my opinion, it's become such a raging success. Same, but different. Same hero-who-doesn't-want-the-mantle formula, same type of nerdish, ostracized main character, same outsider-against-the-odds theme, same mix of magic and lore and mythology that you see in tons of other fantasy series.

But there's something fiercely unique about it. I finished it feeling as if I'd never really read anything quite like it.

That said, I haven't read past book one. I would rather read books for adults.
Now see, I held out for years before I read it too, then it still took me four times to get past the first chapter. I just didn't give a rip about Harry. But I finally made it through and I got to the end and I still didn't give a rip about Harry.

I mean, I enjoyed it, somewhat. And it was entertaining. But I saw nothing in it that engendered this fierce loyalty or explosive sales. 5000 copies per hour for this last book?

I don't get it.

[johnnysannie]

I never said children’s books weren’t huge in the fifties, BUT even as a young child I don’t remember a children’s book highly wanted by adults. Harry Potter is read by children AND adults. As you state, parents bought books for children, there wasn’t an adult craze for a children’s book. If you can provide me with a children’s line of books where adults sat outside overnight to buy it for them and/or their children, please do so because I would be interested in knowing.

Yes, reading is imagination yet we also pretended outside the reading world, because we didn’t rely on television or electronic gadgets to entertain us. I left this point out figuring everyone knows it.

When I was young I read, but wasn't an avid reader and neither were the neighborhood children. I will alter my response in saying it was an individual decision regarding parents searching high and low for a toy for their child. YOUR parents may have searched all over town for gifts for you, but MY mom, aunt and neighbors did not go to that extent. If E-Z Bake oven wasn’t within reach, we didn’t get it - plain and simple.

I’ll agree to disagree with you. In my area and in society as a whole, the extent parents went to in getting their child the latest hot toy or wanting them to use their imagination has changed a lot. Nowadays, parents will sit out all night to make sure they get PS2 station, Harry Potter book (party), etc. I'm not saying your mother isn't right ;) it's just that I'm going off what my mother has told me and she says she knows everything. :D



I'll go with the agree to disagree bit:D . Our neighborhod was inner city, lower working class, not at all priveleged or upper crust but those years were good years for most working folks (economically probably the best I will ever know in my lifetime as America was still riding the post World War II boom) and I was far from alone in having trendy or popular things. Lest you think that I was alone in my possession of such things, one set of cousins (who lived two blocks away) had EVERY new board game that came out, EVERY new and trendy toy like the Magic 8 Ball, and so forth.



Now about your mother know everything, though, I must disagree - it's not possible because mine does!!!;)

[TrainofThought]

TrainofThought, wow, your icon is . . . well very attractive Lol :)Thank you very much. I do take pride in my representations. :D

Now about your mother know everything, though, I must disagree - it's not possible because mine does!!!;):roll: Oh mothers, they are funny and believable.

[Toothpaste]

In the end it is a matter of taste. Enchanted, you like Eragon, as you yourself said, many do not and yet it is a huge success. Many hate Harry Potter, can't understand why on earth anyone would read these books, why on earth ADULTS would read these books, in the end they are still a huge success. So obviously despite what one thinks of something, obviously other people out there have a different opinion. To them it is just as mind boggling that you don't like Harry Potter, as it is to you that they do.

For what it's worth I think there are a lot of obvious elements in both Eragon and Harry Potter, that I can see why they are popular.

Harry Potter is a boarding school book, which a lot of kids love as a setting, no parents etc. Harry Potter is about magic. But better still a school of magic, imagine going to a school of magic! (as someone who played lots of make believe, there is tons of fodder there, because we all know what going to school is like, and then you can just add a little twist). There is also her sense of humour and a pretty amazing knowledge of how kids/teenagers act and think. Then there is the fact that Harry Potter is a boy, and while girls will read books with an opposite gender as the lead, boys tend not to as much and so she has appealed to everyone. And lastly there is the whole soap opera element, what will happen between Harry and Voldemort, who will hook up with whom . . . and what secret mentioned in book 2 will she reveal in 6 etc etc. I also think she managed to cross many genres. I personally am not a fantasy fan (a bit of a lie, for some reason I like fantasy movies, but not books . . . weird . . .), so for me with Harry Potter it was the boarding school that roped me in. I think actually a lot of die hard fantasy fans don't like Harry Potter because it isn't fantastical enough. It exists in our world and there are a lot of parallels with our every day life, not in some distant past, or parallel past, or planet. As such it lacks that epic scope (oddly though the plot of Harry Potter is a save the planet kind of thing), that sense of journeying and myth that the other fantasy books tend to have.

Eragon however appeals to just this fantasy crowd, to the fan fiction in all of us. But I would say it appeals more to those who haven't read much fantasy fiction yet (as it is quite similar one could say to other earlier fiction). This is not to say that only new comers to the genre like it, but from what I hear it was very popular with teenages who may not have already read LOTR. It is obviously LOTR 'inspired' and was written by a 15 year old boy about a 15 year old boy who gets a dragon and saves the world. I saw again a lot of make believe realised in this book. The idea of raising a dragon, who doesn't want their own dragon? Then the quest, getting the girl, saving the day, while getting to be in a cool parallel past kind of environment with cool clothes . . . kind of fun!

Point is, again, it's a matter of taste. And when people go on about books in this utter disbelief, especially fellow writers, it annoys me a little because there obviously has to be something in the book that people are enjoying. And of course we are allowed to like something and not like something, but maybe instead of automatically thinking everyone else is insane because they like something, try to understand why it is so well liked. I have done that personally with Eragon. I do not like it, but I can understand why others do. I am not indignant that others do. Yes I love Harry Potter, but I can easily point out its flaws as well as its amazingness. Maybe think about it for a few seconds before asking and try to answer your own question. It serves a writer well to be able to analyse what seems to work and what doesn't. Especially if the writer himself does not like the work. To look at something you don't like and go, okay what makes this popular, is an excellent exercise.

[enchantedfire5]

In the end it is a matter of taste. Enchanted, you like Eragon, as you yourself said, many do not and yet it is a huge success. Many hate Harry Potter, can't understand why on earth anyone would read these books, why on earth ADULTS would read these books, in the end they are still a huge success. So obviously despite what one thinks of something, obviously other people out there have a different opinion. To them it is just as mind boggling that you don't like Harry Potter, as it is to you that they do.

For what it's worth I think there are a lot of obvious elements in both Eragon and Harry Potter, that I can see why they are popular.

Harry Potter is a boarding school book, which a lot of kids love as a setting, no parents etc. Harry Potter is about magic. But better still a school of magic, imagine going to a school of magic! (as someone who played lots of make believe, there is tons of fodder there, because we all know what going to school is like, and then you can just add a little twist). There is also her sense of humour and a pretty amazing knowledge of how kids/teenagers act and think. Then there is the fact that Harry Potter is a boy, and while girls will read books with an opposite gender as the lead, boys tend not to as much and so she has appealed to everyone. And lastly there is the whole soap opera element, what will happen between Harry and Voldemort, who will hook up with whom . . . and what secret mentioned in book 2 will she reveal in 6 etc etc. I also think she managed to cross many genres. I personally am not a fantasy fan (a bit of a lie, for some reason I like fantasy movies, but not books . . . weird . . .), so for me with Harry Potter it was the boarding school that roped me in. I think actually a lot of die hard fantasy fans don't like Harry Potter because it isn't fantastical enough. It exists in our world and there are a lot of parallels with our every day life, not in some distant past, or parallel past, or planet. As such it lacks that epic scope (oddly though the plot of Harry Potter is a save the planet kind of thing), that sense of journeying and myth that the other fantasy books tend to have.

Eragon however appeals to just this fantasy crowd, to the fan fiction in all of us. But I would say it appeals more to those who haven't read much fantasy fiction yet (as it is quite similar one could say to other earlier fiction). This is not to say that only new comers to the genre like it, but from what I hear it was very popular with teenages who may not have already read LOTR. It is obviously LOTR 'inspired' and was written by a 15 year old boy about a 15 year old boy who gets a dragon and saves the world. I saw again a lot of make believe realised in this book. The idea of raising a dragon, who doesn't want their own dragon? Then the quest, getting the girl, saving the day, while getting to be in a cool parallel past kind of environment with cool clothes . . . kind of fun!

Point is, again, it's a matter of taste. And when people go on about books in this utter disbelief, especially fellow writers, it annoys me a little because there obviously has to be something in the book that people are enjoying. And of course we are allowed to like something and not like something, but maybe instead of automatically thinking everyone else is insane because they like something, try to understand why it is so well liked. I have done that personally with Eragon. I do not like it, but I can understand why others do. I am not indignant that others do. Yes I love Harry Potter, but I can easily point out its flaws as well as its amazingness. Maybe think about it for a few seconds before asking and try to answer your own question. It serves a writer well to be able to analyse what seems to work and what doesn't. Especially if the writer himself does not like the work. To look at something you don't like and go, okay what makes this popular, is an excellent exercise.

Hi Toothpaste (funny name :)) I'm sorry I annoyed you a bit with my question. I was just curious is all. You made VERY excellent points.

For me when I write I do not think "what would be popular? What would sell? What would be 'cool?' " I just write a type of story I find interesting and hope others may like it. If not so be it, but I have alot of fun, and even get out my emotions and feelings pretty well when I write. You go into your own world.

[scully931]

I feel strongly that if I had not begun reading HP before the hype, I would have gone into it with a defensive attitude. As it was, I bought it before I had ever heard of it. In fact, I thought the author's name was Harry Potter and, even after I saw the character's name, thought "Gee, a bit big headed to name the main character after yourself." haha... I got it straight soon after, though.

At any rate, I LOVED it when I felt like I was the only one who knew about this secret world. I told people about it and enouraged them to read it as well. About a year later, it exploded. On one hand, I was glad for it. But, I admit, it was never quite the same as when I considered it a great secret.

Then the movies... ugh. I know this isn't a debate on movies, but they are so childishly acted. (love the costumes and sets though)

At any rate, I bet there are a lot of people who would have felt more kindly toward the series if they hadn't had ten million people telling them to read it 'cause it's soooooooooo good. I know I would have never fell in love with it the way I did. Do I like every single chapter? Nope. Trudged through Order of the Phoenix. Still, I was so wrapped up in the world, it felt like just a hard year at school I had to get through to continue the journey.

If anything, these books prove that some will prevail in spite of a lack of advertising. Remember, they didn't go into this with a bang. Only 500 first editions were printed in the UK. Advertising was quite minimal. I found it near the back of the bookstore. I remember they called it the book that readers sold.

[Tailien]

The books success is akin to catching lightening in a bottle.
The perfect literary storm so to speak.
Advertising played a part, the Christian Conservative Far Right played a part by banning the book, the kids who begged mom and dad to write a check for that chocolate milk stained Scholastic Reader order form are also responsible for its success, and most importantly J.K Rowlings is responsible for telling a good story and giving the series a good foundation on which to build this book, movie and merchandise empire.

If you look at from an adult perspective, the world that J.K. Rowlings created isn't that far away from our very own. Wizards, Witches, Trolls, Giants, Elves and wands, ease's the reader into this magical world. For the adult who is reading the book to his / her children at night or just flipping through the book to see what their child is reading can easily get caught up in the story and characters.

From the kids perspective, I think back when I was 10 or 11 years old. The books show a world just out of sight, around the next corner, or down that dark shadow filled alley. With the vast cast of interesting and conflicted characters, all of which are Arch types of the modern world, it's easy to find a piece of yourself reflected in the characters. Easy to imagine a place where you might fit in, a place where you can fly and do magic and have great adventures with your friends.

In short the story, this world is easily accessible to both children and adults.

I avoided the series at first, thinking like many that its a fantasy for children what can it offer me the experienced Fantasy / Sci-Fi reader. The one thing that finally won me over was when my youngest sister who only read for school and complained with ever other page, purchased the books for me one Christmas.

I was intrigued, what kind of fantasy book could get her excited, and determined enough to recommend it to me and follow through with just wrapping them up as a Christmas gift.

I may never achieve this level of success, but I tip my hat to J.K. Rowlings for making the Fantasy world easily accessible to children and adults of all ages.

[Allynegirl]

For me it was her storytelling ability. I slip so easily into Harry's world and look around starry-eyed at everything. When I read her books, I am there. I feel the wonder of becoming a wizard, the thrill of having friends for the first time, the terror of fighting a basilisk, the chill of the dementor's presence, and the anguish of the death of someone too young.

The last few books, while I felt they should have been edited down a fair bit, layered plots and twists and kept me guessing without sacrificing the engaging stories.

My hat is off to JKR - she deserves her kudos.

[anodyne]

J.K Rowling sold her soul to the devil.

<nods>

But thank god she did. Because all those thousands of little kids who picked up reading because of it are going to be our target audience in about five years. That's hot.

[scarletpeaches]

Unless of course, Harry Potter is all they read.

[anodyne]

Ah, but once you start reading you can't really put it down. There's a tremendous sense of accomplishment in finishing a book that just isn't there in a movie or television show. Video games - probably.

My only experience with Harry Potter and kids is with this boy I used to babysit. He hated reading. He was mildly dyslexic and his pleasure reading came in the form of video game back story. He wouldn't read magazines, he wouldn't read comics. He picked up Harry Potter at school one day, brought it home, and was finished with it in a week.

Finished the second, third and fourth books, and then had a break-through. His mom asked if I knew any books that were "Harry Potter-ish" for him to read. I helped compile a reading list (already a librarian at seventeen, geesh) and we went to the library to get him the books.

Now he's a teenager and an avid reader. Can't say that will happen for everyone, but it might...

[JBI]

Unless of course, Harry Potter is all they read.
Perfect point. I would agree with that. I doubt any of them pick up Lewis Carrol, or Kipling's Jungle Book, Or Dahl's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

Believe me, I see no real problem with kids reading Harry potter, but the argument "At least they are reading" I find to be idiotic. Essentially you can see someone reading a tabloid magazine and say "I don't care that they are reading stupidity, at least they are reading." Where do you draw the distinction between reading that helps, and reading that doesn't? I doubt many of those fans will go on to read much more. I think they will probably just tag onto the next "big thing".

[scarletpeaches]

My uncle's 48 and says the only thing he's read in his adult life (apart from professional texts) are the Harry Potter books. Now that can't be right.

My target audience is a bit more widely read than that.

[Toothpaste]

But scarlet, just because one person only reads Harry Potter, doesn't mean that others don't read more. I read a lot of stuff, and I read Harry Potter. I think you can choose a target audience definitely, but to suggest that Harry Potter is aimed at people who will only read Harry Potter is a bit off. It's aimed at the middle grade fantasy market. It became huge. Even people who never read read it. Actually, I think that is pretty cool.

[scarletpeaches]

I don't remember saying that Harry Potter books were aimed at those who would ONLY read Rowling's books.

My point was there are a lot of people who don't normally read, who ONLY read Harry Potter - I didn't say that applied to all of Rowling's readers. I mean, I've just finished HP7 and it's one of roughly 120 books I read each year.

[writingislife]

I cant believe that people cant connect with Harry. I connected with ALL of the characters. These books, at times, have made me laugh out loud hysterically...they have also made me cry like a baby with some things that happened to some characters (wont mention who just in case you guys are really reading the series...no spoilers here.) Anytime that a book can make me, a big burly macho type guy who doesnt cry at anything, cry, then that is a book that I have connected with. These books made me really get into the heads and the hearts of the characters.

It's funny...my wife and I could hardly stand the wait for each and every book that came out. We talked about the books, saw the movies (several times), and then waited with heightened anticipation until the next book came out. Im 41, and never in my reading life have I anticipated a book like I have the seven that Mrs. Rowling have written. It saddens me that I cant have that sense of anticipation again as this is the final book...but it also makes me glad that she wrote those seven books so a multitude of people had the chance to pick up a book and get immersed in a world of fantasy. That is what this is all about in my opinion...

Just my 2 Cents...and that isnt much. :D

[Toothpaste]

Sorry scarlet! I didn't mean to offend, and of course I should have known you didn't quite mean that seeing as you had just read the book and stuff! I guess I didn't understand what you meant by "my target audience is more widely read than that", or at least what the point was of that sentence.

[scarletpeaches]

I guess I was saying that my target audience would be more widely read because if they only read HP, then I'm done for, as my books are nothing like Rowling's. And of course if you read something by a new author it's always a risk as you don't know if you'll like it or not, so I'd be aiming at a readership which was willing to try new things (and books).

[Toothpaste]

I get it now! Sometimes I am slow. I apologise for zee slow.

[scully931]

Well, even if Harry Potter is all someone ever reads for pleasure - it's better than nothing. And, they have chosen well. Within these books are mythology, creative thinking, pschycology and moral lessons. They'll come out of it for the better! :-)

[Cassiopeia]

Why is Harry Potter so popular? I just don't understand!! I am not at all knocking Harry Potter or J.K. Rowling, God bless her. But I can't BELIEVE how popular her books are. I liked the first two movies, but couldn't get past the first book. For me it was boring, and emotionless. But that's my humble opinon.

Harry Potter seems to be the most popular series I've ever heard of and I can't figure out why!! LOL> :)Because no matter how poorly written the first book is, she is a story teller and a very good one. :)

[Wolvel]

Because no matter how poorly written the first book is, she is a story teller and a very good one. :)

I would have to agree, no matter what she is telling a story in a whole from beginning to end.

For the record I just turned 37 and over the past weekend I bought and completly read the Deathly Hallows. I enjoyed it the whole book.

[TheKnightWhoSaidNi]

I agree with the above. Rowling is not a particularly gifted writer of narrative prose; she has some style, and a dry wit in parts, but she is the queen of redundant dialog attribution ("said angrily", "said disbelievingly," etc. as if we can't figure that out ourselves from the dialog), and overwritten emotions. She tells a little too often rather than showing.
BUT. Her story is unbelievably suspenseful, funny, frightening, and endlessly inventive. It speaks to everybody and anybody, offering a tale that is so rich and fast paced despite the length that it has universal appeal. The characters, the dialog, the events, the spells, Quidditch, etc. etc. Everything about the story itself is so cleverly told that it boggles the mind. It is truly a case of the story winning out over the qualities of the prose, and I eat it up. I finished the last book in a day and a half, 759 pages. Only the most pretentious of literary snobs can deny that the reason so many people are pulled along like that is because this woman knows how to craft a hell of a story. Period.
And really, isn't that why we read in the first place?

[JBI]

I would like to add that I see Harry Potter as somewhat proof that males are reluctant to accept a female protagonist.

There are plenty of kids who only read Harry Potter. Plenty who have read the books 10 times each (or more). People who probably know more about every detail of the Books than Rowling herself. Is that right? Should we support this?

[TheKnightWhoSaidNi]

"Is that okay? Should we support his?"

Sure, they could be reading "Eragon." Oh, wait...

All kidding aside, many kids do know more about the books than Rowling, she's admitted this. And 10 times is an understatement on some behalves. I've only read the last two all the way through once, the others maybe three times. The fifth twice, I think.

Ideally, HP would lead kids onward to the other great books out there. In many cases it has, but there are kids who only read Potter. Frankly, they chose wisely.

[TsukiRyoko]

I agree with the above. Rowling is not a particularly gifted writer of narrative prose; she has some style, and a dry wit in parts, but she is the queen of redundant dialog attribution ("said angrily", "said disbelievingly," etc. as if we can't figure that out ourselves from the dialog), and overwritten emotions. She tells a little too often rather than showing.
BUT. Her story is unbelievably suspenseful, funny, frightening, and endlessly inventive. It speaks to everybody and anybody, offering a tale that is so rich and fast paced despite the length that it has universal appeal. The characters, the dialog, the events, the spells, Quidditch, etc. etc. Everything about the story itself is so cleverly told that it boggles the mind. It is truly a case of the story winning out over the qualities of the prose, and I eat it up. I finished the last book in a day and a half, 759 pages. Only the most pretentious of literary snobs can deny that the reason so many people are pulled along like that is because this woman knows how to craft a hell of a story. Period.
And really, isn't that why we read in the first place?
I've often thought about this and I often have the same question popping up into my head:

Is Rowling a good writer, or a good thinker? I've looked at her style of writing, and it's not hard to replicate. Once you notice her style, despite its being pretty distinctive, it's actually very simple.

Then you examine the story itself and, while it's fun and amazing to read, you begin to realize that it must have been even more amazing to write. How in the WORLD did this woman come up with this stuff?! It's brilliant, genius- I've seen a lot like it, yet I've seen nothing like it! I wouldn't mind talking to Rowling as a writer, but I'd kill and then some to get a glimpse into her mind and figure out how it ticks. She has quite the imagination, and I'm sure I'm not the only person who's envious of her.

There has to be a pattern to her train of thought. Everything clicks so well into place, and it seems like it came naturally to her as she wrote it (despite its complexity(ahem.... by "naturally", I don't mean "without editting"). I will figure out this woman's tricks and will become the richest person alive.... *rubs hands together greedily*

[scully931]

Only the most pretentious of literary snobs can deny that the reason so many people are pulled along like that is because this woman knows how to craft a hell of a story. Period.

I gave you a rep point for that statement! :D People will deny until they're blue in the face that they are jealous, but I believe 98% of people who put down her writing are jealous. (Honestly - not talking about this thread. I mean, I can find things I don't like about it as well. - If she used the word "snogging" one more time in HBP I was going to take hostages.) But, I remember all sorts of complaints about her hogging the best sellers list, etc. Also, I LOVE the fact that she can ignore so many of the "rules" that are discussed ad naseum and yet manage to tell an AMAZING story. :)

[Literary Device]

Well, I was going to try to come up with some coherent, interesting (to me, anyway, lol) reasons but since I was up well past my bedtime last night after being sucked into Rowling's latest offering, all I have to give are tired, off the cuff answers.

While Rowling isn't a terrific writer in a literary sense I suppose, she's clearly mastered the art of writing an exciting, engaging tale, with just the right mix of fun, easy to read prose coupled with an exciting, not completely unbelievable tale.

Rowling mastered weaving a complex story while still, each individual book didn't feel like filler (to me, anyway) and had purpose. She was able to sprinkle just enough clues to keep you guessing about the next book and yet didn't withhold so much, as so may series tend to do, that you really felt cheated and read on more out of obligation than desire.

Most importantly, I think, she really cared about her characters (Rowling admitted in an interview that she'd intended to kill off a major character in book five but changed things because she just couldn't bring herself to do so) and you could tell that through her writing. They were true to character and, while book 7 is freshest in my mind and is the only one I can comment on semi-coherently, interesting, complex and did things that, while not expected, made you feel as if you knew them better, not that Rowling was trying to contrive the characters to fit a pre-ordained plot.

Really though, who the heck has any idea. If anyone figures it out please, let me know. I'd love to cash in.

[Literary Device]

Ideally, HP would lead kids onward to the other great books out there. In many cases it has, but there are kids who only read Potter. Frankly, they chose wisely.

I don't know that I agree with this statement. I won't pretend to know what the right answer is but personally I'm not a believer that reading for reading's sake is enough. Quality counts and while I'm happy to see kids reading I'm not so sure that reading HP and not being launched into something a bit more complex is a heck of a lot better then... I don't know; whatever else kids do.

I've heard it compared to fast food in that fast food will fill you up and sustain you, but will it improve you? Keep you healthy? I sort of feel the same way about fluff books in that they do nothing to challenge you or improve your mind.

Now, lucky for me I eat McDonalds every so often, so I can read fluff books on occasion as well. Moderation is what I'm all about. :tongue

[aruna]

I read the first HP book just before the avalanche started - I knew it was a bestseller and bought it for my daughter. She was only very mildly interested; I thought it was a good kid's book, but I was not drawn in at all and I couldn't understand the all round adult enthusiasm for the book. I read one more but that was it.

I think in my case it's the fact that I can't suspend my disbelief at all when it comes to magic. I just dislike it, period; I mean anything to do with spells, incantations and so on, and I found the books didn't have enough depth to capture me. I found them superficial. I am not particularly drawn in by fast-paced action; I like a book to move me emotionally and nourish me intellectually (even kids' books!) as well as keep me guessing, and these just didn't.

ETA: this is exactly what I mean: I've heard it compared to fast food in that fast food will fill you up and sustain you, but will it improve you? Keep you healthy? I sort of feel the same way about fluff books in that they do nothing to challenge you or improve your mind.

A book that I found infinitely better that HP 2 and 3, as far as imagination and substance and sheer readability (for an adult) is concerned, is The Neverending Story, by Michael Ende. Now THAT was a book I couldn't put down.
The HP books, at least the ones I read, remain for me just average children's books. My daughter also didn't get into them.

[Toothpaste]

Well I will bite the bullet and say I think JK Rowling is actually a good writer.

I think the way she observes teenagers and writes them is just brilliant. She can craft a joke beautifully, and writes about very complicated emotional subjects while keeping her intended audience in mind (I refer readers to towards the end of 7 and Harry's walk in the woods, as well as book 1 and the Mirror of Erised). The ease with which her writing comes off the page is deceptive, makes it seem like anyone can do this. I won't say that there isn't flaws in her work, but I don't just think it's all about her world building. I think there has to be something in there in way she shapes her sentences and paragraphs. I think they are substantial works. I don't consider them fast food at all. They are fun, magical, and yes, even profound. I think they will have staying power.

I've read a lot of kid lit. I like a lot of kid lit. And Harry Potter to me is up there with the best of them.

[Zoombie]

I think she's gotten better as she's written. I was shocked, shocked at how much the books have grown emotionally, just by reading the seventh and then the first, then the seventh again.

Though it's not my favorite fantasy series of all time, which undoubtedly goes to Harry Turtledove's awesome "A World at War, in a world where magic works."

Because Harry Potter has Nazi allusions and Voldermort is another way to say Hitler, I like it. Because it's engaging, I like it. Because it has Lupin, I like it. Because, lets face it, Lupin is awesome.

Now, I'm going to break down and sob for a few minuets.

So, really, I say literary types can stick it in their ear, J.K Rowling wrote a really cool, fun to read book series that is huge, surprisingly complex and has inspired a load of kids to read. And, say, if their parents picked up a book and said, "If you liked Harry Potter, you'd like this one." and they actually read it...well...then she's done something for reading, as a whole.


As anyone who works Jurisfiction knows, we really need to get the Read-O-Meter up.


PS: I really like Nazis. Just look at my avatar! NAZIIIS!

Actually, that's technically more of a Russian Commissar in space than anything else. Those are cool too. But Nazis are just always the BEST bad guys ever. Ever.

[aruna]

So, really, I say literary types can stick it in their ear, J.K Rowling wrote a really cool, fun to read book series that is huge, surprisingly complex and has inspired a load of kids to read.

I wonder if my post above inspired that remark? Maybe not. Just in case, though, I wanted to say I love a good story as much as anyone else; story is the main thing for me. I just didn't get blown away by the first two books. Reading is subjective; I'd hate to be labeled "literary" (with a negative undercurrent!) just because these aren't my type of books!

[CoriSCapnSkip]

This is a question I've entertained for years, well, entertained may not be the word, it's BUGGED me! The series does show a lot of imagination, but there are hundreds if not thousands of better-written, shorter, more to-the-point books. This seems to be some case of mass hysteria. I wonder if there is something to the witchcraft thing and there is some spell/deal with the devil where nothing touched by Harry Potter can fail! :Huh:

[aadams73]

This seems to be some case of mass hysteria. I wonder if there is something to the witchcraft thing and there is some spell/deal with the devil where nothing touched by Harry Potter can fail! :Huh:

:rolleyes:

[Cassiopeia]

This is a question I've entertained for years, well, entertained may not be the word, it's BUGGED me! The series does show a lot of imagination, but there are hundreds if not thousands of better-written, shorter, more to-the-point books. This seems to be some case of mass hysteria. I wonder if there is something to the witchcraft thing and there is some spell/deal with the devil where nothing touched by Harry Potter can fail! :Huh::roll:ahahaha :ROFL: hehehehe

:Ssh: sorry, thought you were kidding. :)

[JimmyB27]

I would like to add that I see Harry Potter as somewhat proof that males are reluctant to accept a female protagonist.

There are plenty of kids who only read Harry Potter. Plenty who have read the books 10 times each (or more). People who probably know more about every detail of the Books than Rowling herself. Is that right? Should we support this?


Well, I thought that Pratchett's Tiffany Aching novels were way better than Potter, and I'm a guy and Tiffany is a girl.

[JBI]

So, really, I say literary types can stick it in their ear, J.K Rowling wrote a really cool, fun to read book series that is huge, surprisingly complex and has inspired a load of kids to read. And, say, if their parents picked up a book and said, "If you liked Harry Potter, you'd like this one." and they actually read it...well...then she's done something for reading, as a whole.


Depends how you see it. What makes a good author? James Joyce was one of the most influential writers of the 20th century (perhaps the most important writer) yet the average reader will never even come close to picking up his work. Should we judge books by how much they are read? Do we now consider the Da Vinci code to be one of the best novels due to its huge sales? Is Stephen King a great literary figure? What about Grisham? How can we say what is good and what is bad just by looking at consumer acceptance.

Don't get me wrong, I hold nothing personally against the books, but I am relluctant to see them as more than they are. A simple child story that appeals to people because of its simplicity and its escape. Do we want kids reading these books to escape their problems? Should we support escapism in literature? All these are important questions to ask about the book. Personally, I don't think she is all everyone makes her out to be; her prose, lets face it, is nothing special, her story, I would say, is nothing too original, and her characters, I would say, are quite flat. Perhaps she got better, I quit half way through the 4th. The characters weren't going anywhere from there, and I just lost interest.

I think someone needs to do a study to see the results on the amount children are reading due to having liked Harry Potter. Then maybe we can actually have a discussion and not an assumption game.

[Zoombie]

I wonder if my post above inspired that remark? Maybe not. Just in case, though, I wanted to say I love a good story as much as anyone else; story is the main thing for me. I just didn't get blown away by the first two books. Reading is subjective; I'd hate to be labeled "literary" (with a negative undercurrent!) just because these aren't my type of books!

Oh, nothing really inspired it beyond being awake at 4:30 AM and shambling around the internet like some kind of brain-dead hick.

[Provrb1810meggy]

I don't know if I've already contributed to this thread, but one of the reasons I love the book is that I can relate to and love the characters.

Actually, I don't care nearly as much about Harry as I do Ron and Hermione, but I still care about Harry, enough to not want him to die. Ron and Hermione are who I love and who I read the books for. I feel like I am Hermione, because we have so much in common. When something happens to her, I feel like it's happening to me, and I get emotionally involved in the story.

[Garpy]

Mainly luck. The book found a gap in the market at just the right time. Initial sales weren't spectacular...no-one was looking at HP back then and thinking this will sell millions of copies.

It got lucky. It got rebranded for the US market and found a much bigger YA/Fantasy gap, sold enough copies to trigger a second wind in the UK. By then of course, there was a growing critical mass of people in the biz who could smell sales and thus started talking the book up.

It's a so-so series of approproated ideas cobbled together around the moderately appealing idea of Boy who goes to Wizard school.

If there's anybody who deserves a medal, it's her agent Christopher Little, who spotted the initial market gap in the first place.

[Harimum]

I wish I could think of why I love the Harry Potter books so much. I can't say I've read all of the posts on this thread as I have a little Harry of my own who keeps demanding my attention but I'm interested enough to keep coming back and work my way through them one by one as I get the time!

I think for me the Harry Potter thing is another world, a magical one (no pun intended) where anything is possible and there are no limits on what could happen or what a person could do. It's so full of wonder and boundless possibilities.

I used to love those Sci Fi things when they land on an alien planet and have no idea what will happen when they leave the space ship too, a similar feeling of 'anythings possible' I guess.

What I really love about the books too is the lack of sugary sentiment, there is always a humour to it, and also the hidden messages that are there if you notice them. I think it can be enjoyed on many levels, so maybe that's why it's accessible (imo) for adults too.

For example the names of things that have very subtle hidden meanings, puns and jokes. Diagon Alley (diagonally)

The mirror where you see your desires (read the mirrors name backwards and it's something like -not what is there but your hearts desire.

There are too many to mention but I love the characters, the puns, the jokes, the magical (again no pun intended) world where normal rules don't apply and the only boundaries are set by your imagination, not by natural law.

but no that's not why I called my son Harry! :)

[TsukiRyoko]

. Do we want kids reading these books to escape their problems? Should we support escapism in literature? I've heard this a lot about reading in general, and while the wording of the questions make it seem like a bad thing, I have to say that the reason most people read are precisely for these reasons. Whenever I'm stressed or bored or mourning, I pop a squat and crack open a book. Fiction is, essentially, the creation of another world and the temporary escape from this one- and that's precisely why it's so appealing.

[katiemac]

I've heard this a lot about reading in general, and while the wording of the questions make it seem like a bad thing, I have to say that the reason most people read are precisely for these reasons. Whenever I'm stressed or bored or mourning, I pop a squat and crack open a book. Fiction is, essentially, the creation of another world and the temporary escape from this one- and that's precisely why it's so appealing.

Good lord, I just spent the majority of today reading Chamber of Secrets -- specifically for escapism purposes. Last weekend, I read Everything is Illuminated and Wonder Boys so I wouldn't realize I was on an airplane. In the spring, I read Handmaid's Tale and Watchmen so I would forget I had homework.

[Ageless Stranger]

Brilliant, original but covers the bases we've all seen before.
My only real gripe with the book is, yes, the goddamn length.

And it's still one of the few books I've read repeatedly.

[RLSMiller]

I've often thought about this and I often have the same question popping up into my head:

Is Rowling a good writer, or a good thinker? I've looked at her style of writing, and it's not hard to replicate. Once you notice her style, despite its being pretty distinctive, it's actually very simple.

Then you examine the story itself and, while it's fun and amazing to read, you begin to realize that it must have been even more amazing to write. How in the WORLD did this woman come up with this stuff?! It's brilliant, genius- I've seen a lot like it, yet I've seen nothing like it! I wouldn't mind talking to Rowling as a writer, but I'd kill and then some to get a glimpse into her mind and figure out how it ticks. She has quite the imagination, and I'm sure I'm not the only person who's envious of her.

There has to be a pattern to her train of thought. Everything clicks so well into place, and it seems like it came naturally to her as she wrote it (despite its complexity(ahem.... by "naturally", I don't mean "without editting"). I will figure out this woman's tricks and will become the richest person alive.... *rubs hands together greedily*

One important thing to note is that she outlined HP for five years (it says so on the hardcover book jacket). If you spend that much time outlining, things are bound to click. She's said herself she has tomes of backstory that didn't even make it into the series - she just felt that she needed it to make the stories feel real. I don't think she's technically the best writer in the world, but she's invested a lot of care and time into the books, and stumbled upon a pretty lucrative phenomenon in the process. And at the end of the day, I don't read to spot technical excellence, I just want to be entertained.

For me, the most attractive thing about HP is its authenticity. It's easy to believe in the world and the characters, and it's exciting for me to picture myself in that world. It's a real environment with fantastical elements, and I always gravitate towards those types of stories. I enjoy the sense of security you get by identifying with a world similar to your own, and the fantastical slant that lets you lose yourself in the wonder of it all.

[CoriSCapnSkip]

Currently a year into suffering through reading Book 6. MUST finish this series, and reading myself, (no cheating with audiobooks) or die trying! :e2thud:

[Ken Schneider]

The Harry Potter series was fresh and new and different.

Unlike the so many copy-cat vampire love stories out there today.

Fresh and new and different will get you noticed.

[CocoCat]

I really recommend reading the whole series if you want to understand what's so good about HP.

It's the characters. In spite of all the fantasy, she keeps the people in it real and three-dimensional. They all have a history and they're all flawed. I finished book one thinking it was quite fun reading so I'd try the next. By the time I reached the part where Dumbledoor dies I shed tears and had a moment of grief even though I was reading that as an adult. Snape in particular is a very interesting and well thought out character. He went through various degrees of villainy throughout the whole series until we finally find out about him at the very end. Things keep happening throughout the later books that make you want to re-read everything over again.

Also, she doesn't shy away from the graphic details or stark realism of pain, death and suffering, like how children's stories used to be. HP wasn't just living in a cupboard for the fun of it, he was a neglected child. You can't presume any of the characters are safe (book four is blunt on that point). One of the big questions before the series finished was whether Harry would live or die. It was never a certainty even for those of us who are conscious of story formula.

One of the main points of interest for me is that holocausts do happen and the HP series in that sense is an exploration of how and why.

I try to encourage people to read the whole series, simply because I feel they are missing out if they don't.

[Stunted]

I was in third grade when the craze hit, so I'm kind of the expert, I guess.

I reread the first book, recently, and I was really blown away by it. On every level. And then...


Perhaps the root of the Potter craze is the serialization of it.

This. I mean, the second was really good too, and I enjoyed the third and fourth. Then I tapped out. But I mean, people had these characters and world in which they were invested, and they knew that on XYZ date, they and all of their friends were going to rush to the store--maybe amid a crowd of costumed fans--and get the next book!

They'd get another adventure. Maybe there'd be a romance. Maybe there'd be a funny scene with Malfoy. What is Voldemort going to do this book? What cool shit is Harry going to fight? The wanting of more and the approach of more fed one another and fed into fan activities which fed into wanting more which fed into anticipation...it was just a cycle.

My issue with the books is how serious they get, because a) I don't read Harry Potter for the biting social commentary or the angst and b) once it gets serious, you have to think about it in a serious way, and the world just doesn't hold up under scrutiny. (Why are the Weasleys poor? Can't they just magic up everything they need? Why don't they just team up with Muggles? Or at least adopt some of their technology. Why don't they just go back in time and punch Voldemort's mom in the stomach?)

But by the time it got serious, people definitely just wanted to see how it would end, so they read it all the way through. And a lot of people really enjoyed it.

[CocoCat]

One important thing to note is that she outlined HP for five years (it says so on the hardcover book jacket). If you spend that much time outlining, things are bound to click. She's said herself she has tomes of backstory that didn't even make it into the series - she just felt that she needed it to make the stories feel real. I don't think she's technically the best writer in the world, but she's invested a lot of care and time into the books, and stumbled upon a pretty lucrative phenomenon in the process. And at the end of the day, I don't read to spot technical excellence, I just want to be entertained.

I expect she just took notes and played with ideas as they came to her. I read a lot of classic children's literature (it's trippy!) and I found 'The Waterbabies' in a charity shop recently, which is hard going because Charles Kingsley clearly liked to ramble on, but I've spotted a particular couple of pages in it which I'm convinced she read and used. "...unicorns, firedrakes, manticoras, basilisks, griffins, phoenixes [...] three-headed dogs...", all this in relation to a professor and The Times (maybe inspired the inclusion of the wizarding paper), followed by lists of very HP-sounding remedies, including the Bezoar stone, Mandrake pillows, "Madam Rachel's Elixir of Youth. The Poughskeepsie Seer his Prophecies"...I'm sure I've missed things too.

It's not the first time I've found something she borrowed. It's what she does with it that's great though.

[M.Austin]

The Christmas after HP came out, I was in sixth or seventh grade, my mother bought me a copy. My father bought me a copy (divorced parents). Two aunts bought me a copy. At the time, I didn't like it. At all. I read the first two chapters, thought Harry's life was dull and boring. Put it down.

While I think that children loving the book made it successful, I also think that she was one hell of a marketer. I've never had anyone buy me the same book again in my life time. None the less four of the same book in a day.

With a bit more patience, I reread the series and thought it was fun and light. I also thought it got exponentially better each book.

[SHRous]

Currently a year into suffering through reading Book 6. MUST finish this series, and reading myself, (no cheating with audiobooks) or die trying! :e2thud:

The audio books, however, are the best I've ever heard. Jim Dale created a separate voice for EVERY character, even the minor ones, and keeps that voice in every book. (I did read the books, and then we listened to the tapes whenever we were in the car. My children did not want to leave the car after school to listen, and they've read the books too.)

[DavidZahir]

Why are the Weasleys poor? Can't they just magic up everything they need? Why don't they just team up with Muggles? Or at least adopt some of their technology. Why don't they just go back in time and punch Voldemort's mom in the stomach?
It has been explicitly stated that there are limits to magic, including (for example) several items that cannot be conjured, i.e. made from nothing. One explicit example of this is food. Looking at the series, it seems pretty clear that gold would appear to be another. Also, different types of magic require great expertise. If you are excellent at Potions it does not follow that you are then a master of Charms. Thus the Wizarding economy is built partially upon the sale of services by experts (like Mr. Ollivander and his wands, for example) and also upon the exchange of items not immediately susceptible to magical creation.

Further, there are laws intended to keep Muggles from ever realizing that Wizards exist, and entire government agencies whose job it is to keep the secret. So simply teaming up with Muggles presents problems--on top of the psychological problem that people raised in a magical world tend to see things very differently from Muggles, impeding their understanding of things like technology. There is even a class at Hogwarts to try and teach some understanding of what Muggle society is like.

As far as time travel goes, it was also explicitly stated that really terrible things happen to wizards who mess about with time. Hermione in POA was extremely careful not to interfere with events as they had already occurred. Also, in OOTP all the magical time machines were destroyed during the raid on the Ministry of Magic.

As for the original question at the top of this thread...here is my answer.

The Harry Potter series became so popular because they are well-written, with characters most of us find compelling, tell a ripping yard that is also topical without being "on the nose," set in a well-crafted and entertaining fantasy world to which many people relate. More, we were in the mood for something like this.

[katiemac]

Three-year-old thread. Just saying.

[Jamesaritchie]

I finally read the last Harry Potter book. I don't think the popularity of the books is a mystery. Very, very good writing, wonderful characters, magnificent story. What else does it take?

I have no doubt these books will not only stand the test of time, but will probably outlast cockroaches.

[Lady Ice]

I don't like fantasy books; I find them tedious and far too complicated. But I really like the HP series. I suppose because it harks back to those British boarding-school type books of the 50's; there's something very British about the books.

I also like the amount of care and detail in it and the different characters.

[Libbie]

Three-year-old thread. Just saying.

THE MAN YOU ARE TALKING TO HAS BEEN DEAD FOR THREE YEARS!

;)


I enjoyed the Harry Potter books. I read them long after they'd first been published. I like YA (good YA -- holy cow is there a lot of terrible YA out there) and I had a fun time reading them. The characters are well devleoped and continue to develop in believable ways over the course of the series. However, I didn't read the last one. I just lost interest. I'm fine with knowing these characters exist -- I don't need to see them to the conclusion of their story, I guess.

It's a well-made fantasy world, and the characters are all alive. I think that's why it's done so well. I doubt Twilight will have as lasting an impact on YA literature (or literature in general, or popular culture) as HP has and will continue to have, and this is undoubtedly due to the depth and reality of Rowling's characters compared to Meyer's. Making the comparison there because both have been mega-sellers with movie deals and screaming fans.

[shadowdragon]

I read the first one about the time the fourth one was coming out. I liked the the first few but then they got too serious and Harry got annoying. I did read the last one but I borrowed it instead of buying it. I didn't like it. It seemed rushed and little too much like watching a movie rather than reading a book. I liked the first three books when things were lighter and funner.

[Pyrohawk]

I can honestly say the Harry Potter series was my favorite of all time. Bear in mind I am THE generation for it being about 9 when the first one came out. I didn't pick up in them right away though... I actualy resised reading them for a long time as I just hadn't caught the fantasy bug just yet. The 4th book was getting ready to be released when a friend finally forced me to read them. I read the first 3 books in 4 days. The rest is history.

I have always wondered if they truly belong in YA. I have read so many posts about them being aimed at 10-12 year olds and such. But Harry was 17 in the end of the last one. That is probably why I liked the books so much...and most the fans as well. The books, and Harry....grew up with me. As I got older and more mature so did Harry and so did the content and plot of the story. Or so I felt.

I have also never understood the people who say that the first book or two were great then it got old. I still pick the books up from time to time....but I havn't been able to reread the 1st or 2nd one in years. I disliked the first two (well compared to the others anyway). People say they are more magical and wonderous/fun....I just equated them with childish. I don't REALLY like any of the books until about the 4th one.

Just my 2 cents.

[blacbird]

I think most everybody here is over-analyzing. The first book hit because it exactly appealed to its target audience (which wasn't adults, remember). It was clever, had a good dose of humor, and was written well enough to make it work for that audience. And, at the time of its appearance, it had no obvious natural rivals, so it stood out. It filled a big gap for an unexpectedly large and hungry demand. Nothing more complicated than that.

caw

[katiemac]

I have always wondered if they truly belong in YA. I have read so many posts about them being aimed at 10-12 year olds and such. But Harry was 17 in the end of the last one.

First three are MG, last three are YA. The fourth one bridges the gap between. Deathy Hallows is the only one Scholastic categorizes as YA, however.

[shadowdragon]

I have also never understood the people who say that the first book or two were great then it got old. I still pick the books up from time to time....but I havn't been able to reread the 1st or 2nd one in years. I disliked the first two (well compared to the others anyway). People say they are more magical and wonderous/fun....I just equated them with childish. I don't REALLY like any of the books until about the 4th one.

Just my 2 cents.


See when I first picked them up I was an adult who was married with a two year old and a 6 month old and spent all day with serious grown up stuff like house cleaning,work and bills. I enjoyed the first three because of their light hearted childishness. For the adventure of being a kid again in a magical world with nothing to pressing to worry about but owls and grumpy teachers.

[Lauretta]

Three-year-old thread. Just saying.

Still fresh :)

I finished only the first two books few months ago. I found the first one very good, at the end I was sympathetic and I stood up on HP' side. The second one was a bit more tedious.

I gave up after 4 chapters of the 3rd book. I couldn't get into the story and I didn't like the 'mature' HP, I thought he was a bit too spoiled.

I think she is a genius though, for the way she built the world. Fair play to her.

[ChristineR]

Actually, I think it's luck. This is not to say that it could have happened to anybody. First of all, the series is of high quality. But there are other high quality series out there that didn't create a phenomenon.

There are elements which certainly helped, like the whole subplot of what it's like to grow up without any real family, and of course kids love magic. But again, there are many other series that touch on similar themes. And possibly there was less competition at the time, in the sense that there weren't too many seven book series that covered the same themes.

What I believe happens is something like this. A certain number of people (mostly children in this case) read the books and like them. They tell their friends about it. When someone has had enough recommendations from enough trusted friends, they buy the book and read it--which in turn, generates more recommendations. Finally you reach the point where more or less every child is reading the books, and talking about the books, and then you get the phenomenon.

I really don't think there's much more to it than that. It could have happened to a different series, and in the future, it probably will..

[katiemac]

I really don't think there's much more to it than that. It could have happened to a different series, and in the future, it probably will..

Once the books starting catching on, however, the series had an enormous marketing push. Enormous. Without that marketing push, we would not have seen Goblet of Fire sell 1 million copies overnight, and every successive installment break its own record.

The Twilight series followed the Potter marketing model.

[Lauretta]

The Twilight series followed the Potter marketing model.

Which is?

I don't believe you can sell nonsense with good marketing strategy...

[gothicangel]

I remember a tv ad being run over here in the UK a few years ago.

That was enough to put me off the books for life :D

Seriously though, I did try recently but I couldn't get it.

P.S A previous thread refered to a British Boarding School 'thing.' Can someone explain this to me? I've never met anyone who went to one. I am aware of a few in southern England, but that's an upper class thing.

[BenPanced]

WHY IS ____________ (title) SO POPULAR?! I THINK IT'S __________ (adjective) AND CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE THINK IT'S _________ (adjective) AND CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHY PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT TASTE THAN I. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. EVERYBODY NEEDS TO LIKE THE SAME STUFF THAT I DO BECAUSE THEN WE'LL ALL GET ALONG AND I WON'T THINK YOU'RE ___________ (adjective).

Move along. Nothing __________ (adjective) here, nothing to _________ (verb). Move along, move along.

[CACTUSWENDY]

Reading it as a 10-12 year old I found it a fun read....all of them. Had a lot of humor/intrigue in them. If they would have been for an older kid set they would have been on the boring side. I also think they grew up as the story got older.

I think they are a good way to get lost in a story. I saw several places that could have been a bit clearer but on the whole I enjoyed them. (I read them so I could discuss them with my grand daughter.)

Keep in mind I am an old lady and not everything I like is mind boggling deep. I also feel that Rowling was at the right place at the right time and her publishers did a fine job marketing all of them. A full group effort.

[katiemac]

Which is?

One of the biggest marketing strategies Twilight copied was the midnight book release parties. It wasn't the bookstores idea to do that; Scholastic encouraged them to organize.

[shadowdragon]

Which is?

I don't believe you can sell nonsense with good marketing strategy...

Twilight and its movies sold.

[blacbird]

I don't believe you can sell nonsense with good marketing strategy...

Google Bernard Madoff.

caw

[Quossum]

Zombie thread alert! But hey, there's still some life in the ol' girl...

There have been many intelligent posts about why the series became popular, but I can't keep my fingers from responding to praise for the books' characterization. In general, yeah. But (spoiler alert), Hermione being forced to fall in love with (and marry, and reproduce with) uber-idiot Ron Weasley killed all respect I had for JKR's characterization skilz. Totally didn't ring true with me.

Okay, okay, I suppose in real life there are bright, hardworking girls falling for tedious, whining, unamusing sidekick-type guys, but c'mon. I'd so wanted something more for my favorite character in the series. Why, Hermione? Why, JKR? Why?

--Q

[fredXgeorge]

I LOVE Harry Potter. I can't explain why, really. But I love everything about it. It's my absolute favourite thing in the whole world. It does really annoy me when people talk about it being a children's series. Yes the first two were kids books but they get increasingly darker. Children can definitely read them all but the last few are not 'children's books'.

[Krintar]

But (spoiler alert), Hermione being forced to fall in love with (and marry, and reproduce with) uber-idiot Ron Weasley
You're complaining about that? Didn't everyone ever see that coming from day one?

[swvaughn]

Oooh, MadLib!!!

WHY IS _The Men Who Stare at Goats_ SO POPULAR?! I THINK IT'S _squishy_ AND CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE THINK IT'S _orange_ AND CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHY PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT TASTE THAN I. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. EVERYBODY NEEDS TO LIKE THE SAME STUFF THAT I DO BECAUSE THEN WE'LL ALL GET ALONG AND I WON'T THINK YOU'RE _loquacious_ .

Move along. Nothing _sassy_ here, nothing to _hop_. Move along, move along.

Thanks, Ben! :D

[Priene]

P.S A previous thread refered to a British Boarding School 'thing.' Can someone explain this to me? I've never met anyone who went to one. I am aware of a few in southern England, but that's an upper class thing.

Boarding school novels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarding_school#Books). Billy Bunter and Jennings were the two most prominent ones when I were a lad. They work well because they allow children to have adventures without parents calling them in to tea all the time.

[gothicangel]

Hmmm.

A literary tradition it may be, but it puts out an elitist [and false] representation of British education. I believe Boarding schools are more prevalent in France than Britain.

[Pyrohawk]

Zombie thread alert! But hey, there's still some life in the ol' girl...

There have been many intelligent posts about why the series became popular, but I can't keep my fingers from responding to praise for the books' characterization. In general, yeah. But (spoiler alert), Hermione being forced to fall in love with (and marry, and reproduce with) uber-idiot Ron Weasley killed all respect I had for JKR's characterization skilz. Totally didn't ring true with me.

Okay, okay, I suppose in real life there are bright, hardworking girls falling for tedious, whining, unamusing sidekick-type guys, but c'mon. I'd so wanted something more for my favorite character in the series. Why, Hermione? Why, JKR? Why?

--Q
Ok, I'll gove ya that one. I thought that was stupid. And didn't fit very well.

You're complaining about that? Didn't everyone ever see that coming from day one?
No? Did anyone see it until the last book? The movies sure because they knew to plant that seed, the books being finished. But in the books I never saw it.
I LOVE Harry Potter. I can't explain why, really. But I love everything about it. It's my absolute favourite thing in the whole world. It does really annoy me when people talk about it being a children's series. Yes the first two were kids books but they get increasingly darker. Children can definitely read them all but the last few are not 'children's books'.

I agree. Thats what I mean by not understanding how they are YA. I always lump young adults and childrens novels in the same category. The later books just seemed far to complex, dark, meaningful for most children in my opinion.

[ChristineR]

I saw Ron loves Hermione coming from at least the second book, where he makes her cry by calling her some bad name. Teacher's pet or something. Harry never liked Hermione in that way--the books are from his POV and he makes her sound very ugly and unappealing.

It becomes obvious in the fourth book, when Hermione is dating Victor Krum, and Ron can't say a single good thing about him, even though Krum is a Quidditch god.

[ejwriter]

so funny to see this thread revived now, because i just quoted the first line of the sorcerer's stone in another thread as one of my favorite first lines.

i started reading HP to see what the phenomenon was all about. the first two books were SUCH fast reads that i blew through them in a weekend and picked up the third - which i actually REALLY REALLY liked. after that, i was so involved in the story, i stopped noticing whether the writing was any good. JK is a master of plot and action. also, she managed to cram a LOT of characters in her series without losing clarity, which i really admire in a fantasy tale.

[aruna]

P.S A previous thread refered to a British Boarding School 'thing.' Can someone explain this to me? I've never met anyone who went to one. I am aware of a few in southern England, but that's an upper class thing.

Well, you met me!

I went to an English boarding school. They are all over the place, not only in the South. In my home town alone there are three. Most boadring schools are not only for boarders; most accept day pupils, and most of them are excellent schools. Even the one I went to, in Yorkshire: in my day it was as you said definitely an upper class school, and there was only one day girl in the whole school. Today it is at least half day pupils, and solidly middle class.

I went because I badgered my mother into sending me, and all because of -- yes, you guessed it -- books! I devoured those Enid Blyton boardingschool books and that life just sounded super and jolly.

We were neither upper class nor rich. The only reason my mother could afford to send me was because she had just come into a lump sum in insurance money and shought the best investment was my education. And she was right.

It was a brilliant school, and is still going strong (Harrogate Ladies College) (http://www.hlc.org.uk/). I learned so much that I would never have learned anywhere else, and to this day I have good memories of that place. People tend to run down boarding schools as cruel places for rich kids offloaded by indifferent parents, but my experience was really only good, and not only from the academic side.

It was the all-round education that was so good; I learned about things I never would have at home in Guyana. We had concerts and lectures every weekend; boring for the most part and yet, the stuff stuck. Excursions: to the Mystrey Plays, the Bronte house, Gilbert and Sullivan, all manner of things.

Most of all, though, I'm thankful for the Christian education I got there; my parents were atheist so I knew very little about Christianity. It was a deeply Church of England school with the day beginning and ending in services, chapel on Sundays, and so on. At the time I found it boring but it planted a seed in me that later grew strong and deep, and though I ended up not being a Christian but something else, I am very grateful for what I experienced there. Hymns like "Jerusalem" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFrVrBQh_50&feature=related) (new version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G1QvkHpGNo&feature=related)by Mary Hopkin) can bring tears to my eyes to this day; it's an exquisite experience. The most beautiful song ever. And it's amazing how many of the hymns and prayers I learned there I can still recall.


Hmmm.

A literary tradition it may be, but it puts out an elitist [and false] representation of British education.


The boarding schools in Eastbourne are actually more slanted towards the day pupils than towards the boarders, and it is they who set the standard, I believe. And they are mostly solidly middle class, at least, judging from the friends of my children, who went to one of those schools (http://www.stbedesschool.org/Prep-School) as day pupils. I am by no means rich or elitist; I struggled for years to afford the fees and I think many parents do so, but my children ended up being as grateful to me as I am to my mother for the sacrifice.

Yes, there is a divide between state school pupils and private schools pupils, and its quite noticeable in our town, and it's a pity. The state schoolers call the private schoolers snobs, and the prvate schoolers call the state schoolers chavs; and unfortunately, the latter is true to a great extent, at least here in Eastbourne. I don't know of a single really good state school here. You just have to look at the website (http://www.stbedesschool.org/Senior-School-Welcome-to-St-Bede-s-Senior-School) of the boarding schools to make your mouth water as a parent. I wanted the best for my kids and was ready to go to any lengths to get it.

Back to the subject of boarders: they are definitely not the main focus. Except for the obvisouly elitist schools like Eton, Harrow, Cheltenham etc, most boarding school today are just very good independent schools with boarding facilities for children who live further afield, and if parents can afford them, they make that choice.

I think back in the day boarding schools often catered for children whose parents lived abroad. Those was the days of the British Empire, adter all.

I just wish the state schools would pull their socks up and strive for a better standard, not only in academics but in behaviour.

As for there being more boarding schools in France than England: no, I can't believe that.


Boarding school novels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarding_school#Books). Billy Bunter and Jennings were the two most prominent ones when I were a lad. They work well because they allow children to have adventures without parents calling them in to tea all the time.

For girls it was Mallory Towers and St Clare's!

Oh... and to get on topic at last:
I read the first two Harry Potters and while I thought they were good children's books they did not grab me at all, and I didn't understand why so many adults were going gaga. As for the later ones being more adult: I don't care, not interested. I don't like books about magic.

[Priene]

Strictly speaking, boarding schools don't even have to be independent. I went to a state boarding school. As a day pupil. And hated it with an intensity which doesn't so die with the passing of years as merely ossify.

[Lauretta]

One of the biggest marketing strategies Twilight copied was the midnight book release parties. It wasn't the bookstores idea to do that; Scholastic encouraged them to organize.

Twilight and its movies sold.

Google Bernard Madoff.

caw

Ok, I've learned my lesson. So as any book could be a best seller with a great marketing strategy, why did it happen only with few, or does it?

[waylander]

P.S A previous thread refered to a British Boarding School 'thing.' Can someone explain this to me? I've never met anyone who went to one. I am aware of a few in southern England, but that's an upper class thing.

I also went to a boarding school between the ages of 13 and 18.
One of the big name ancient public schools and I'm a good long way from upper class/aristo

[shaldna]

there have been many times where i have gone 'whut??' at what is popular.

with the HP books though I can see their appeal. they are after all childrens books, and they are simply and elegantly written, and i think that this is part of the huge appeal. they are very easy to get into, you don't need to understand the whole world to read them.

[Lady Ice]

I remember a tv ad being run over here in the UK a few years ago.

That was enough to put me off the books for life :D

Seriously though, I did try recently but I couldn't get it.

P.S A previous thread refered to a British Boarding School 'thing.' Can someone explain this to me? I've never met anyone who went to one. I am aware of a few in southern England, but that's an upper class thing.

Not solely upper-class; you can get in on scholarships, I think. But you have series like the Mallory Towers series and the Jennings books where groups of schoolchildren have mischievous fun and they get sent jumpers and sneak around after-hours.

[katiemac]

I LOVE Harry Potter. I can't explain why, really. But I love everything about it. It's my absolute favourite thing in the whole world. It does really annoy me when people talk about it being a children's series. Yes the first two were kids books but they get increasingly darker. Children can definitely read them all but the last few are not 'children's books'.

The last few are young adult novels. But you're also probably not giving 'children' enough credit. Sure, the novels are increasingly dark, but that doesn't mean some children can't handle them.

Ok, I've learned my lesson. So as any book could be a best seller with a great marketing strategy, why did it happen only with few, or does it?

Not any book can become a bestseller with good marketing. Readers still have to like the product.

Two things happened with Harry Potter: Scholastic spent an unusually large sum of money on the American rights to publish Harry Potter, far more than was common (it went to auction and Rowling walked away with the largest advance ever for a foreign children's book). Because of that, the bookstores paid attention. They stocked the books, but more importantly, the books sold.

The books were selling extraordinarily well on word-of-mouth and push by booksellers. Scholastic and Bloomsbury saw this and seized on the opportunity. They funneled a lot of money into marketing and publicity campaigns (JKR touring the UK in the Hogwarts Express, as one example) and launched the word-of-mouth popularity into a massive worldwide phenomenon.

But this took time. The first three books sold very, very well, but it was the release of the fourth book that solidified "phenomenon" status, and after that, they continued to up their marketing and publicity strategies so each subsequent novel outsold more and more. Despite the long gaps between publishing four and five, they kept readers' interest by keeping the books and JKR in the press as much as possible. The release of the movies helped, of course, since the films were coming out during the gap.

But yes, had readers not liked the books, none of this would have mattered.

[aruna]

[QUOTE=katiemac;4506340

The books were selling extraordinarily well on word-of-mouth and push by booksellers. Scholastic and Bloomsbury saw this and seized on the opportunity. They funneled a lot of money into marketing and publicity campaigns (JKR touring the UK in the Hogwarts Express, as one example) and launched the word-of-mouth popularity into a massive worldwide phenomenon.

[/QUOTE]

Yes, I heard about the first book by word of mouth, and bought it for a friend's daughter, long before it was a bestseller. People were just talking about it.

[SarahMacManus]

Harry Potter is a great story, adequately told.

JKR blended a mixture of universal elements that engage readers to the fullest, particularly young readers.

One of the saaviest tricks of the whole series was that she allowed Harry & Co. to grow up over the course of the story, and subsequently, for the books themselves to become more grown up accordingly, which kept pace with the increasing age and sophistication of the core audience.

It's a great story. It's not amazingly written, but it's a great story.

[katiemac]

Yes, I heard about the first book by word of mouth, and bought it for a friend's daughter, long before it was a bestseller. People were just talking about it.

For kicks, let's look at the numbers of the early novels. Keep in mind marketing is in the works here as well, but not nearly the level of marketing the later novels received.

01. First print run of Philosopher's Stone in the UK is 500 hardback copies. (1997) Then, I believe, about 5,000 in paperback.
02. First print run of Chamber of Secrets in the UK is 10,000 copies. (1998)
03. First print run of Sorcerer's Stone in the US is 50,000 copies. (1998)
04. First print run of Chamber of Secrets the US is 250,000 copies. (1999) Scholastic moved up the release date by a few months when they realized impatient fans were ordering COS overseas.
05. First print of Prisoner of Azkaban in UK sold 68,000 copies in two days (1999)
06. First print run of Prisoner of Azkaban in US is 500,000 copies. (1999) All three books are in the top three positions of The New York Times best seller lists.

And somewhere between 98 and 99, Warner Bros. had purchased the film rights.

When it comes time for Goblet of Fire to publish in the UK and US, the first print runs jumped into the millions.

[Lauretta]

I'm impressed.
Me = jealous.

[Phaeal]

Rowling is a natural writer who loves her story. The right reader senses this on page one.

Too bad she either lacked sharp editors or resisted them. For me, there are flaws that keep the series only "very good," not "great."

[katiemac]

Rowling is a natural writer who loves her story. The right reader senses this on page one.

Too bad she either lacked sharp editors or resisted them. For me, there are flaws that keep the series only "very good," not "great."

I once read an interview with Rowling's assistant editor at Scholastic. I wish I could find it again. This woman was assigned specifically and only to the Potter books as it took so much time and energy to work on them.

Part of it, too, I think, is the rush to put the books out when the drafts were done. Rowling herself has said she would go back and edit a lot more of out of Order of the Phoenix, for example.

[K.L. Townsend]

I once read an interview with Rowling's assistant editor at Scholastic. I wish I could find it again. This woman was assigned specifically and only to the Potter books as it took so much time and energy to work on them.

Part of it, too, I think, is the rush to put the books out when the drafts were done. Rowling herself has said she would go back and edit a lot more of out of Order of the Phoenix, for example.

Interesting since my main complaint on that book was that it needed more editing.

I thought the series itself was fun and earnest, which I think is the main reason it did so well. The plot was good and the characters were great, and each had a distinct voice. I don't think her prose/writing was the best, but because you knew you were going to have a good read, I don't think that bugged a lot of people.

[lvcabbie]

Just to throw this out - I'm 70 years old so can't be included in the teeny market.
I first heard of Harry on the internet and didn't bother to read it until a couple of years later.
I really enjoy the books I've read. Well written with very good character driven plots. I got a general idea of the characters but had them confirmed when I saw the first movie. Since then, I've seen every movie released but still need to buy some of the later books.
To me, the most important thing about HP is how JKR wrote something to draw young people to reading - not just sitting in front of a boobtube or playing video games.

Over the past years, I've noticed a marked increase of young people on forums like this that confirms that HP has resurrected an interest in books. [I loved books when I was a kid and other kids made fun of me for being a bookworm]

[curlbe]

P.S A previous thread refered to a British Boarding School 'thing.' Can someone explain this to me? I've never met anyone who went to one. I am aware of a few in southern England, but that's an upper class thing.

I'm American but went to Oxford (for undergrad) & I'm also a massive Harry Potter fan...I think the perception in the US of the 'british boarding school thing' derives from the fact that, in my experience, it's a lot more common for upper middle class british kids to go to boarding school than their socioeconomic equivalents in America. Of my closest ten friends from Oxford, 7 went to boarding schools (mix of boys & girls) and none of them were super wealthy or aristocratic...so there is some truth to it, but it's probably not as common as a lot of Americans imagine. Also, it might be geographic as most of my friends were from the South & London...?

[SarahMacManus]

I'm American but went to Oxford (for undergrad) & I'm also a massive Harry Potter fan...I think the perception in the US of the 'british boarding school thing' derives from the fact that, in my experience, it's a lot more common for upper middle class british kids to go to boarding school than their socioeconomic equivalents in America. Of my closest ten friends from Oxford, 7 went to boarding schools (mix of boys & girls) and none of them were super wealthy or aristocratic...so there is some truth to it, but it's probably not as common as a lot of Americans imagine. Also, it might be geographic as most of my friends were from the South & London...?

We don't have quite the stigma attached to our public schools - some of them are quite good. Many, if not most, of our upper middle class kids go to public schools, but the schools in their areas are quite fine. Private schools here are usually for the religious.

The line between the "working class" and the "middle class" is a lot more blurred here. There's not the noticeable difference between the kids in our working and our middle class. They break themselves up into little cliches, like all teens do, but it's rarely based on what their parent's do for a living.

[Jamesaritchie]

Rowling is a natural writer who loves her story. The right reader senses this on page one.

Too bad she either lacked sharp editors or resisted them. For me, there are flaws that keep the series only "very good," not "great."

She had a great editor, and didn't resist. I thought the eidtor did a great job. But just what is it you think an editor should have done? I can't find a flaw in the books.

[gothicangel]

I'm American but went to Oxford (for undergrad) & I'm also a massive Harry Potter fan...I think the perception in the US of the 'british boarding school thing' derives from the fact that, in my experience, it's a lot more common for upper middle class british kids to go to boarding school than their socioeconomic equivalents in America. Of my closest ten friends from Oxford, 7 went to boarding schools (mix of boys & girls) and none of them were super wealthy or aristocratic...so there is some truth to it, but it's probably not as common as a lot of Americans imagine. Also, it might be geographic as most of my friends were from the South & London...?

I kind of suspect that it was a perception thing, but kept it zipped in case I crushed some people's toes :D

[SarahMacManus]

She had a great editor, and didn't resist. I thought the eidtor did a great job. But just what is it you think an editor should have done? I can't find a flaw in the books.

I think the last one was rushed out the door. Months and months of endless camping in Book 7.

[ChristineR]

Actually, Rowling's editor is famous for adding at least one key mistake, which was fixed in later editions.

At the end of Goblet of Fire Harry and Voldemort dual with identical wands, which causes Voldemort's wand to expel images of the last spells he's cast--a sort of feedback effect. The last spells he cast happen to be murders, including the murder of Harry's parents. Images of the murder victims are supposed to appear in reverse chronological order, which means Harry's mother should appear before his father, but in some editions, the father appears first--because the editor didn't understand how it worked, and "fixed" it, and Rowling didn't catch it until too late.

I'm not sure the months of camping were caused by a rush. I seem to recall Rowling finishing the book (and saying so) well before the book came out. There are tons of problems with that sequence. Besides being boring, our heroes are starving, despite there being dozens of ways that hungry wizards can get food. They have a bottomless bag of supplies, for one thing, and supposedly wizards can increase the quantity of food once they get it, not to mention enchanting muggles to help them, turning desks into pigs, etc., etc.

[CoriSCapnSkip]

Three-year-old thread. Just saying.

Feel justified in bumping it up as it's taking me a lot longer than that to read the series!

[CoriSCapnSkip]

Is it true she was living in her car for a time before she got published? Or is that just B.S.?

There was a story about her living in an unheated apartment in Scotland in winter, which she dismissed as rubbish, so if that wasn't true this can't be.

[CoriSCapnSkip]

The audio books, however, are the best I've ever heard. Jim Dale created a separate voice for EVERY character, even the minor ones, and keeps that voice in every book.

Okay, you sold me. If I don't finish Book 6 by at least 6 months before movie 7 is set to come out, I will resort to the audiobooks.

[gothicangel]

There was a story about her living in an unheated apartment in Scotland in winter, which she dismissed as rubbish, so if that wasn't true this can't be.

A few years ago she wrote the intro to W&A. She says she was working as a teacher when another teacher saw her writing the book. He asked what she was doing and gave her a copy of W&A.