you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Shitty people can make good art. Death of the author.

Just never give them money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    My 2c tho, the Harry Potter novels legitimately suck. This has been my opinion of them since I was in 8th grade when the first one came out. At the time I described Sorcerer's / Philosopher's Stone as a failed attempt at ripping off Roald Dahl (British author who wrote mean-spirited children's books that stereotyped characters with funny-sounding names based on their physical descriptions). I was frequently urged to and attempted to give the books a second chance, never got more than 20 pages back into any of them before I put them down in exasperation because to me they always felt very petty and derivative. I was not very surprised when JK started to peel off her mask to the public.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Why do you think they're so popular then?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Children have less reading comprehension, wizards and magic are cool to kids, and nostalgia appears to be my generation's (millennials) lead poisoning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Okay, so why specifically that series among the many other wizards and magic series? I think Rowling is a piece of shit as any sane person should, but let's not warp reality. The books may not be your cup of tea and of course they're not perfect, but they're definitely good books, otherwise they wouldn't have gained the popularity they did.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Because they became a cultural phenomenon and were lots of kids first novels. If youve never read anything else youre not going to see the massive flaws.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Well, you just replied to the question "why are they popular?" with "because they became popular". Okay, so why did they become popular? Because despite the flaws they definitely have, they're simply good stories with good world building that suck people in (not just kids btw, plenty of people got into them as adults).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Older guy told me he read Dahl (Matilda?) to his grandkid & passed the lesson that you gotta be careful who you trust… are his works viewed negatively?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I don't think universally. Similar to Rowling, his stuff is beloved and can certainly still be enjoyed but contains some totally wack bits. Even as a kid I picked up on how mean-spirited his writing was. But I think that's also what makes it interesting to some people, it's got this macabe Grimm's quality to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Death of the author

    People here keep using the term as basically a synonym of "separating art from artist" but I always thought death of the author was a different thing. Analyzing the meaning of a book while ignoring what the author says they meant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • It is the latter, kind of

    It's also (i think) separating it from the context of the author and their life/identity (so, for example, m&m using the n word being different from some other rapper doing the same).

    So functions well as shorthand for the former. Or in the case of an author like rowling, as a wish.

  • source
  • parent