The Harry Potter books are, as entertainment, inoffensive. But they're not literature; they're middle-brow pot-boilers.
Did anyone suggest that Ms Rowling should be classified with Shakespeare, Dante or Racine? Not that I can recall.
Certainly, in my own experience, the craze for Harry Potter books was a peer group thing for children, not unrelated to wearing the right brand of trainers. They were bought as status symbols and then languished, a quarter read, for years under the bed. How many of those 325 million copies failed to change the trajectory of the modern TV-raised child who, tragically, does not read for pleasure and probably never will? More than a few, I suspect.
Even if only a tenth of the 325 million copies encouraged children to read more, that would be more than enough. Who else has done anything comparable?
Where I really quarrel with Harry Potter is not in the quality of the writing but in the marketing. This Harry - Harry the brand - really is a monster of the first order. Somewhere along the line the author waved bye bye to her creation and saw it become a global money-making colossus, one which exploited the thrill of the chase and the tribal yearning to be part of something. It wasn't a book; it was a badge of belonging; a cult, Warner Bros.
Actually, Ms Rowling is to be applauded for insisting on retaining marketing control. There have been very few tawdry spin-offs and the movies have remained reasonably faithful to the books. And the marketing came second; it was the overwhelming success of the first book, without the huge marketing effort, that secured its audience. Furthermore, Ms Rowling has admirably resisted the temptation to become a celebrity - she does not do television interviews, other than in connection with the various good causes with which she has associated herself.
This is when I perceived another worrying phenomenon: the rise of the adult fan. Frequently, the grown-ups queueing for their copy weren't doing it for nieces or nephews, but for themselves. In some cases their lips were moving when they scanned the lines, in other cases they didn't even have that excuse.
So adults should not be allowed to read Harry Potter, least of all those who do not read much. Listen to yourself, Ms Reid. What are you complaining about?
1 comment:
This has to be 'quiet week' windup. Rowling has done the business and Reid either resents that, or feels a journalistic need to attack her. As someone who has worked in schools, I can assure Reid that kids read and appreciate these books purely based on readability. I like them too. This is either sour grapes, mediocre journalism, or both.
Post a Comment