Nick Jordan

Actually, HP is not badly written, imho, it’s simply that it’s not great writing. And as a first step into reading, surely it should be applauded, rather than doing that typical British thing of knocking a success story.

Children like the *story*. They relate to it because they too are at school (ok, so not a wizarding boarding school maybe!). Children who read HP move on to Artemis Fowl, etc, and some, a precious few, will read AA Milne, CS Lewis, etc.

Let’s face it - we used to read the Famous Five, the Beano, etc. And yet that led to the above, to Arthur Ransome, to Tolkien, to newspapers, to non-fiction.

Anyway, just me 2 pence worth

I agree with Jean-Yves, but actually I think it’s very well written for its TARGET audience. And anyone who says otherwise has either not read it or missed the point!

Winder seems most annoyed by the fact that its popular. People tend to shoot down anything that gets hype. He said it “reeked of crass commercialism.” I think it’s called good business. He says he has often heard parents complain their kids pressure them into buying the book, only to have it left undread while they play their video games. Maybe that’s the parents’ fault. True book lovers wouldn’t do that, there are millions of people in the world who love Harry Potter for the sole purpose of being able to read it. Although I’m a kid myself, I love to read books and I don’t like video games as much. What annoys me most is Winder said himself he has only tried to read one of the books, and tried to watch one of the movies on a flight where he probably didn’t pay attention. And then he says he will try to read the 6th book to see if he can like it. What’s the point, when he hasn’t read the other 5? He also says HP “paints an unrealistic picture of Britain in 2005.” He goes on to make out like everything in Harry Potter is perfect and green and suburbian-like. What an annoying statement from someone who hasn’t read the series. Harry Potter’s world is nothing but perfect, it’s dark and mysterious. Readers know that everything only looks perfect on the surface. Harry is unrealistic because he doesn’t harrass his neighbors with magical powers? That’s becasue he’ll get suspended for using magic outside school, and be sent back to a home where he is neglected and hated. PS WINDER, that harmless pet rat turned out to be a killer in disguise. And if you’ve completely missed the messages involving terrorists and politicians in the 5th and 6th book, maybe you should get a clue, or actually read the books.

Winder lost the argument as soon as he said he has never read the books or watched a movie. There are so many holes in his
article, that his argument isn’t even an argument.

Thte “curmudgeonly” bit is probably genetic.

Well… don’t worry! You’re not the only one who hate Harry Potter. I’ve found a news that says Americans are used to read the novel as torture to taleban prisoners in Guantanamo :))) Personally, I like it, because it’s easy to read and help me to train my rusty english (I’m italian…)

Bye, Gloutch

harry potter is a looooozer - and i am sick of havin him thrust down us throats. there is a free game to shoot him out the sky at http://www.skoolsucks.co.uk - now that’s magic

sad sad ppl!

C’mon Winder! Did you read shakespeare when you were 8?? These novels are addressed to kids! They usually prefer playing with the Play Station than reading a book. So if HP is being read by millions of kids (being these books so thick as they are!)…where is the problem?
By the way, you haven’t even read none of the books! please!

Harry Potter is a load of ****! I hate him sooooooooo much! I don’t know why. Oh wait! I do! I think he sounds soooooooo smart when he is actualy as thick as a book cover

I loathe the books. I love reading and I love children’s books, but these are written in such boring prose I have trouble finishing a single chapter, let alone whole books. But I’ve read them, because I wanted to know what the fuss was about, and I’m even emersed in the fandom theorizing now (to my shame) because I find the deviousness of the Potter phenomena so interesting, but I still think the books are rubbish and its heroes sociopathic.
I’m serious.
Hermione Granger is neurotic about being the biggest know-it-all in existance to the point of being the most boring person in children’s literature. But hey! At least she has work-ethics. (those are her *only* ethics because she also lies, bullies and disfigures children with impunity)
Ron Weasley feels he’s the least interesting of the Weasley clan and in a desperate effort to become somebody he latches unto famous Harry Potter. Such a rolemodel! Oh, and he’s bigotted, cruel, badtempered and ever ready with his fists.
Harry Potter (saving the most dreadful character for last) is a lazy, hypocritical, judgemental, selfcentered, selfimportant, booby. Oh, and he’s thick as a two-inch plank.
His misjudging of people and their motivations are legendary. He constantly adores the bad-guys-in-disguise who infiltrate his school because these bad-guys-in-disguise are in conflict with his most hated teacher, a teacher he hates because he expects Harry Potter to be respectful towards his teachers and to actually (gasp!) learn something in class!
It must be the Zeitgeist, but I *cringe* every time Harry cheeks his teacher Snape in class.
It would be okay, from a storyline pov, if Harry would eventually *learn* from his experiences, but he doesn’t. So you could add ‘thickheaded, obstreperous and willfull’ to his list.
There’s simply nothing heroic about Harry. He’s not even sympathetic: he’s not kind, he only likes people who fawn over him, but those who refuse to fawn over his eleven-year-old ass are ‘mean’. But he dumps even his best friends when they dare to disagree with him (that’s probably why his only friends are a neurotic achiever who is disliked by every other child in school and a synchopathic sidekick with selfesteem issues)

Reading Harry Potter (or rather: reading Harry Potter fans’ discussion lists) has the same strange, morbid appeal of watching a train wreck. One constantly asks oneself wether the author is playing elaborate games with her adoring fans (because surely she can’t seriously think it’s allright for children to, for instance, facially scar another child for life when that child snitches about her fellowstudents’ illegal behaviour to the authorities? Or that it’s allright to break rules, cheat at schoolwork and competitions, be disrespectful to teachers?)
Without wanting to, the Harry Potter phenomena sucks in even the most wary into the vortex, because it seems so impossible that such a mediocre work of such questionable morality could become so popular.

I agree with Marion about Harry being not lovable part. He’s always playing the hero, I noticed. Always suspecting people he don’t like to plan some big masterpiece to destroy the world or something. Ron and Harry are bad-tempered and if harry’s friends or anybody doesn’t get convinced by Harry, he’ll throw tantrum.
On the other hand, nobody should judge anything if they haven’t really seen or read it. It’s not superly bad or anything. The worst part is that it’s too old-fashioned (everything is made of wood) and it’s middle story is boring. Thick books that contains so little action and climax.

excuse me but HARRY POTTER RULES i think you people have nothing better to do except hate everything all the time its time people should just leave it alone just cause your old and have no imagination it mad millions of dollars in the box office so i think your out numbered

I agree with Marion entirely. I am so glad to see another person who does not inadvertantly drool over Harry Potter. I read the first book, eventually. And I was appalled. I forced myself to read the whole thing though, dull as it was. And the second and third books too. They were the same. And the 6th book. That’s awful too.

The books are mediocre at best, with no surprises, average prose, and predictable endings. Bad guys are bad, good guys are good, every character remains shallow and everybody is background to Harry the Noble, the Tormented, the Fantastically Rich, the Lucky. If you think, even for a minute, that maybe the bad guys have some spark of redemption, think again.

Because there is no grey area in JK Rowling’s world. Only good wizards and bad wizards. The only houses ever really focussed on are the evil Slytherin and the brave, wonderful, best-of-all Gryfindor. Ravenclaw is barely elaborated on at all, and Hufflepuff is portrayed as the ‘crap’ house. We see in the Hat’s song in the first book that just by choosing which house you go into decides whether you will be good, bad or totally ignored.

JK Rowling writes like an eight year old, making the division between good and bad crystal clear - good guys do good things, and even when they do bad things they are rapidly excused because it’s all a ‘mistake’, or they were right anyway. Her world feels 50 years out of date - Harley to JK, the Tories aren’t in power any more, and Enid Blyton died almost 40 years ago.

I’m reading ‘Half Blood Prince’. One sees in the second chapter that all of Harry’s following assumptions about Snape and Malfoy are correct, before Harry even shows up. No, this revalation isn’t saved for later in the book, it’s crammed in straight away so that the reader knows he’s right from the start. Harry and Ron pull their wands in a public place and jibe at Malfoy because his dad’s in wizzy prizzy, and yet they remain ‘good guys’. And this is because anybody who Harry doesn’t like is a bad guy. Or becomes one. Or was one anyway.

Harry isn’t even a particuarly good wizard. Without his Cloak of Invisibility, which seems to get him out of every scrape and is conveniently big enough to also cover two friends, he’d be in serious trouble. He’s also got Hermione to cook up every spell he needs, and Ron to back him up with muscle and fawning. He’s also disgustingly lucky. Admittedly we know heroes have a tendency to be lucky, but Harry’s distinct lack of skill at anything is excused by an irrational, unfair amount of luck.

But wait, there’s a downside to being the hero of the wizard world, the Boy who Lived, teacher’s pet - the fame! But though it occassionally comes off as a nuicance, you can tell that he wouldn’t give up being the hero for everything. Modest - but in a not-quite-so-modest way - Harry hasn’t let it go to his head - much. He conveniently forgets to tell most people that it was because his mother sacrificed her life for him that he lived. He dd nothing. He is no hero. In fact much of the time he comes across as a bully.

When I read the first book, I wasn’t in the least surprised that JK Rowling had been turned down by 9 publishers, but I also can’t say I was surprised that children love the book - it’s so simple in plot that of course they would. I’ve seen more plot in a Mr. Men book, and even in books proclaiming the glory of seeing Spot run. What disappoints me is that adults also gorge themselves on him. It’s nothing short of depressing to think that they have read so little fiction that they think Harry Potter is the epitomy of plot and characterisation.

Worst of all, JK Rowling teaches children that if you are sure that you are right, your actions are excused to prove it. You are excused rudeness, listening in on conversations, stealing, impersonation, bullying, threatening, disrespect of rules and elders… if you are sure that you are right.

Are those really the sort of morals you want your children to grow up believing in?

I do lyk harry potter cos its jst fun 2 read nd I lyk da films aswell….I mean da books r really 4 kids not 4 adults 2 be arguin bou how bad or unrealistic dey r.I mean da figures say it all cos millions of kids world wide luv these books nd dere not made 4 adults 2 read so wats da whole point in readin books dat rnt 4 u age…..U mite aswell be readin Barney!!

So glad to find out I’m not the only one. The trouble with being a Harry Potter hater is that people think you’re jealous, or you hate him just for the sake of it. (look at amy’s post) EXCUSE ME, I’ve got my own brain, I can think for myself. I have seriuos reasons for not being a fan.

Plaese note that I have not read the books in English, so I might not use the exact expressions from the books in my comment.

Yes, I HAVE read the books, not all of them, just the first 4, and I DO intend to do the rest too. My opinion is that JK Rowling is simply a bad author. She constantly uses the same words and phrases, e.g. it’s always “Harry, Ron, and Hermione did this and that”. (Even my younger brother, who was about 10 or 11 at that time noticed it and it got on his nerves.) Why can’t it ever be “Hermione, Ron, and Harry”? Or something more innovative like “Harry and his mates”, “Hermione and boys”, “our three friends”, “the great trio” or even simple “they” - it’s not likely it would be anyone else, as the whole book revolves around them.

But my biggest problem with JKR is… why the hell are you doing this to the best characters, woman???
Namely Sirius Black, Dumbledore and Professor Snape.

I liked Sirius from the first moment I’ve seen his name (instantly knew he wasn’t a bad guy) and thought, OK, the poor kid finally has some adult he can trust and what does this woman do? Kills him.

Albus Dumbledore’s character can be found in every story (check out LOTR’s Gandalf or Obi Van Kenobi [spelling!] in Star Wars), but is still very likeable, actually there can’t be a wizard story without a great old clever wizard with long white hair and beard. I so much lost myself in this man that I dreamt about sitting with him in a small quiet inn in a remote magic-world-style village sipping hot chocolate and discussing philosophy, art, literature, or science. And what does our precious Joanne do? Kills him.

Professor Snape. Actually, the only really intriguing character in this whole saga. Tall, dark and mysterious, he has definitely a very shady past, torn between the good and the bad. You know, I always believed he was a good guy at the end of the day, because otherwise, why would the clever Dumbledore employ him? Sort of a secret agent in His Magic-stick Albus Dumbledore service. And what does he do? Kills Dumbledore!

As for other characters - Hagrid is nice, but so annoying. Professor McGonagall is a fantastic woman, but her creator somehow misses the point about her. The Weasley are a fun bunch, but sooo obsessed with Harry. Ron is like a book with blank pages, nothing you can say about him. Apart from his fear of spiders maybe. Hermione - I really love the girl. Only wish a better author had made her up. Somebody who would have given her more personality. And more independence. She sits in books half her life, but what has she done that didn’t involve the Incredible Harry? Has she done anything for herself? As far as I can remember, only set up a sort of club for protection of house-elves, in which nobody (neither Hogwarts students, nor the readers) was interested. Get a life, luvvie.

Now Draco Malfoy is a guy I’d sooner go for a drink with than anyone else out of that book (except I like dark men and he’s blond). Shame that he’s such a baddie-wannabe. Come on, admit it, you don’t seriously believe he is a bad guy! Other schoolmates and teachers are not worth mentioning. But they’re not really needed, are they? Only when to give Harry standing ovations.

The main character himself? Three words. Boring, boring, boring.

The Hogwarts kids seems to have no hobbies or interests. All they do is go to classes, eat, revise and sleep. No music, magazines, books that are not learning materials, no sports, no art, no shopping, no games. Quidditch? Only played by a handful of pupils and honestly, what’s the point of this game? Why oh why couldn’t Rowling stack with football, it’s the most popular English sport after all. But of course, harry would be rubbish at that one. Don’t ever mention football, or I’ll turn you into a frog!

Now, the Potter lovers say it’s so good for kids, because they finally read instead of watching telly and playing computer games. Apparently, computer games are violent and kids who play them become violent. So read Harry Potter, kids. You start with The Philospher’s Stone/Sorcerer’s Stone. Eventually you got to Goblet of Fire, kids. And there you learn about unforgettable curses, kids. You know, like that one where you take your magic wand, point it on your enemy and say Avada Kedavra and your enemy will die. Just like that without any chance of fight. my dear little kids.
Pass that violent computer game, pronto.

I totally agree with Marion and Harley, I never thought of the issues they brought up, so it means there are even more bad things about HP. Mind you, it’s not like I spend my life hating Harry.

So what if Harry has millions of fans. Does it really mean it’s a good piece of work? Once a song called Crazy Frog topped UK charts, as a result of its many fans buying this record. Does it mean it’s a good song? Erm….

Just how on earth could a country which gave us Agatha Christie produce such a talentless stupid cow like JK Rowling???

-A 16-year-old making out with his classmate just to make another classmate jealous

- a 17-year-old being killed by a guy who cuts off his own arm seconds after

- a 14-year-old beign tortured in front of bunch of adults who just laugh at his pain

- a teeager whose teenage friend, godfather and closest adult friend are all killed in 3 years

- a twisted old guy who tortures, kills and even posseses people and makes them crazy, just to take over the world

- a 17-year-old dumping his girlfriend to go and kill a dictator all by himself

those are a few nice scenes from Harry Potter
those are reasons why it is NOT for children
those are the reasons why I LOVE HARRY POTTER!

Dear Linda,

if you actually read GoF (the fourth book) more carefully, you would have noticed that there is a radio broadcast and a music band mentioned. Hogwarts kids DO like it.

And if you have read OotP and HBP, which you are going to, you would also noticed that kids have other interests as well.

( just by the way, there ARE clues about other interests than Quidditch in the first 4 books. Harry Potter would probably suck at mathematics, but the books indicate Hermione is very good at it.)

If you only read the first 3 books, you would probably say, that HP is all about England and totally ignores the rest of the world, wouldnt you?

Snape is good, that is my personal belief. He killed Dumbledore, all right, but there are hints in HBP as to why he did it.

Malfoy, yeah, he is not that bad. In HBP he cries

The main character? Well he is not that boring in OotP ;)) He starts to get some flaws, finally. Like yelling, doing the wrong judgements, stuff like that. Not completely like Draco, but still.

Ron? Just you wait:)) He is one bad ass in HBP.

And Hermione will change a bit in HBP as well. About time, she is 17 by then.

Sirius….yeah, shame. He has got to die….whatever.

I do not think Harry Potter is good for kids.
HP is NOT for kids at all. The first three books, maybe, but they are still a bit too weird.

Personally, I would have all the books banned for anyone younger than 12.

Simply because kids cannot understand what is going on there.

to Harley:

The endings of HP books are predictable? Did you see it coming that Quirell was the villain?
Did you see it coming that Sirius black was not evil?
Did you see it coming that Ginny opened the Chamber?

Slytherins are all bad? Excuse me, SLUGHORN IS GOOD! HOWGH!

Everyone in the books is either good or bad? There is no grey field? Everything shallow? All right then, please, tell me, are these characters good, or bad:

1)SEVERUS SNAPE

2)Draco Malfoy (Do not tell me he is evil, if you have already read HBP)

3)The Dursleys

4)Marge Dursley

5)Dolores Jane Umbridge

6)Cornellius Fudge

7)Peter Pettigrew

8)Narcissa Malfoy (I do not believe her evil after HBP)

9)Rita Skeeter

10)Marrietta Edgecombe

11)Kreacher

12) James Potter (all right I do not take he is good. Look at the Chapter Snape�s worst Memory!)

13) Peter Pettigrew

14) Merope Gaunt

15) Rufus Scrimgeour

to polly; yes
yes and
yes
i have to say that most of those characters are evil or mean in some way, at least not likeable. the others i cannot imagine because i havn’t “met” them so to speak. no this is not because i never read the series, i read the whole thing, five times over, they just don’t seem to have much detail. i may be wrong, but at least look at neville, do we actually know what he looks like? do not say he has a round face, i know already.

harry should be traumatized by the fact that he has no parents, his godfather was killed, along with his fave teacher, and his guardians treat him like something nasty they stepped in while not too far away there are powerful wizards who could easily protect him but chose not to, and yet he acts like a long suffering heroe with no dark side or any real desire for revenge (which i would have liked, being a dark antihero vigilante lover” ) he acts like a baby, and relies on pure luck. if he had just gone and killed that bloody basilisk, gotten the stone, saved his godfather ect, on purpose without the aid of dumbledore then i would like him a lot better.

yes harry has flaws (finally) but not ones that make you want to get to know and love hime, i would like to slap him for all the cheek and tantrums, but then he would pull a great tirade about me and how i’m totally evil! he should be darker, and actually struggle with the darkness inside and his similarities with good ol’e tom.

voldie was more interesting to me, until the 6th book, whereby we find out he wanted the DDA job, er, why? why do the baddies want the silly job, if only to train the kiddies to be little death eaters, whch never happened?

no death eater struggles with his job implications, redeems himself or acts like a human being for once. nobody knows why they became death eaters, whether its for power, because they are weak easy prey, or for protection
how do they get those marks? where do they meet up and what do they plan for other than the destruction of potter?
i am afraid i do not know much about the potter universe and it’s people. there is just no detail other than that surrounding the potter brat, sufficient to indicate what a selfish little prick he is.

quiddich is useless, meant for surrounding the seeker (guess who) with glory. the rules are flimsy, and the other players are never focused on.

the other characters can be interesting but are never allowd to be because of the plot;

remus will never go wolf and savage someone/reaveal that he did so

tonks will not turn into a statue to help spy on the baddies, or do anything much really, except bat her eyelashes at remus which i saw coming.

slughorn just comes across to me as a bit of a perve, i mean, forcing all those younger people into a single place like that? plus he was brought in to make a point, that the whole school is not totally segregated between the fabulouse gryiffindores and everyone else. it is

we know nothing about neville except that thing about his parents and his boggart.

moody is great but be could be used more often

sirius died too early and had no part to play except to get himself killed in a way that does not seem that final only is, he may as wee never have existed.

and dumbledore? he’s all very great and things but surely he could have been killed in some heroic battle, and i wish we didn’t have to endure all that enphasis on his hand, which is not important. he makes too many mistakes and won’t learn from them, you know, like letting deatheaters into the castle to cause havoc.

it all good if your six, personally i think its not as good as some. it makes a good read overall if your looking for something you don’t have to think too much about. theres blood, theres evil, theres simple easy to understand prose, theres a bit of plot. i wouldn’t say it’s the best in the world though. worst thing of all? rabid fans.

I know you all have your reasons to hate Harry Potter, then so be it, but I don’t see why you have to make a fuss and argue over Harry Potter fans about it? If you hate it so much, then why waste your time explaining why it’s so terrible and such? Why don’t you just go and do something you LIKE, instead of wasting your time explaining your hatred for something?

“If you hate it so much, then why waste your time explaining why it’s so terrible and such?”

Well, Amy, I’d rather give a good reason for hating Harry than shout “I h8 HARRY!” and look like an idiot.

Another problem with JK’s books is Dumbledore.

He clearly favours Harry above all his students, of which he must have a couple of hundred. He’s not a teacher, he’s the headmaster, but he clearly has enough time to give Harry individual nightly lessons on beating those hooded evil things. My god, doesn’t he have more important things to do? Like running a school?

Also, his attitude to everybody. Oh, Snape isn’t really evil. Oh, Draco’s not that bad. Now that’s not a bad attitude, but when JK has frequently made it very clear who the bad guys are at the beginning of the story, it makes him look like an idiot, and it spoils any surprise for us.

And of course, Harry is correct in his irrational assumption that some guy he doesn’t like is working for the bad guys. Harry doesn’t need proof, because he’s the good guy and he’s automatically more right than some guy who has life experience.

And worst of all, JK doesn’t surprise us with this knowledge like a good writer could. She blows it all off like a surprise birthday party, “My goodness, Harry was right all along! I’m so surprised!”

Or worse, she shows it right at the beginning how right Harry is.

I can see why some adults would like this book. It’s not 1990s Britain, it’s more like 1950s. It must take them back to their childhood of boarding schools and chidhood pranks. For younger kids, it’s great because it’s simple. But it doesn’t make for realistic characterisation.

“Well, Amy, I’d rather give a good reason for hating Harry than shout “I h8 HARRY!” and look like an idiot.”

My point was that you shouldn’t spend hours explaining what you hate, or even posting “I h8 HARRY!” If you hate it, then don’t bother thinking on it. What are you trying to do? What is the benefit of explaining or posting, “I h8 HARRY!” to you or to anyone? Are you trying to convert Harry Potter fans to haters or something? Seriously.

Well, Amy, that’s a weak argument. Say something nice or don’t say anything at all. If you don’t like it, don’t read it. Well when I read it, I wasn’t expecting to hate it. I just wondered what the hype was about because the film was about as exciting as getting my teeth pulled. I put that down to a bad conversion and read the books - some of them - anyway.
I love fantasy books. I love Sci-Fi too.
Regarding the ‘crass commercialism’ - well, it is a shame but that’s what happens to any popular icon now. It’s more a shame that such an obnoxious individual as Harry was chosen as a child’s icon.
Regarding Sirus… well, JK introduced him, and she tried to make us feel for him so that when he died it would have an impact. He existed SOLEY to pack Harry with a little bit more reason for vengeance, as if having his parents killed wasn’t enough.
Now most books and films I watch say “Vengeance is a bad thing, it eats you up inside”. That is very true. But nobody - not even Dumbledore - ever tells Harry that living for the sole reason of killing Voldie is going to make his soul rot. In fact Dumbledore seems to encourage Harry’s vendetta. This is because if Harry ignored such good advice - and he surely would - he would come across as bad.
Regarding JK’s surprises - Ginny opening the Chamber of Secrets. Well, she could have pulled that for ANYBODY. That fat kid. Hermione. Ron. There’s nothing special about Ginny. She just did that to make us go “Ooooh, so it wasn’t Snape or Harry”.
Newsflash to JK - sometimes it’s most surprising of all to give your reader the ending they expect. They go “What? But that’s so predicatable I never saw it coming!” But she doesn’t seem to grasp that. She forgets that she’s writing for people. If you’re writing for publishing you do have to cater to an audience, I’m afraid, not just put down whatever you want.

Asked which five of her characters she would like to invite to dinner, she chose Harry, Hermione and Ron, but then hesitated before choosing her last characters, saying “See… I know who’s actually dead,” unsure whether she was permitted to invite those who are ‘dead’.
Therefore I say that since she did not hesitate before saying Harry, he will survive.
Two characters will die. I call Snape and Voldie. It’s quite possible that Snape MAY help Harry in the final battle, but after he killed Dumbledore - and he didn’t just kill him, he promised to kill him if Draco couldn’t, or he’d die - the idea of him really being a good guy in secret is beyond stupid. Especially considering he has already carried out his debt to Harry, and considering how he went mad at Sirus in Prisoner of Azkaban.
Then again, JK’s been planning this for years. This means two things - one, that nothing we said for the last three or four years would have had any effect on the story, and two, that she was planning it back when she was writing like an 8 year old. And she hasn’t told us that the ending will be surprising or anything, just that two characters are going to die.

You would think reading books would teach people how to spell better on these forums, blogs, whatever. And no, I don’t see Harry Potter as a good role model.

The hyp about harry potter is crazy. I liked the first book. She has a good imagination. The movies which tends to be semi- horror scared my kids (6 yrs). Good over evil, hasn’t been done too many times?? Kids do not develop healthy reading habit with these books. Any day Enid Blyton & comic books are better. Hopefully this is indeed the last book & the world is spared of any more nonesence. Rest in peace…
There is nothing in these books to last & soon it will all be like a damp sqid.

Boring…Boring…Boring…and im not talking about harry potter because i like the books. im talking about the sadness of people who dedicate time to say just how much they h8 it. end of the day…so what?? you really think id stop reading because sum twat has a number of reasons y he dusnt like the books?

inside scoop….Lots of people like harry potter….lots of people dont….get over it….if u really think its tht bad go and find something that will bring u the happiness harry potter fans get from reading the books instead of being retards and just seein things from ur own point of view.

Hello, Anonymous. Here’s the thing. This is my website, where I express my opinions. I’m not trying to stop anyone else from reading whatever they want to. Good luck to them. And if I’m sad for having a go at a series of books I’m not particularly fond of, what does that make you for spending the time it took to tell me so?

Just flicked to the ending, what a bloody cop out, all nice and neatly tied up middle class drival, after that type of build up the author pulls back and gives us a fairy tale insted of a decent ending.

Harry Potter- Most people agree it’s pretty mediocre, I’d go a bit further and say it was badly written… there are descriptive discrepancies, the characters are one dimensional+stereotypical and and there are no challenges in the plot.
I’ve read a couple of the first ones (but not purchased) and I would describe it as a cartoon of a book, all the hype….
Unbelievable.

If you like Harry Potter please try “the nine lives of Christopher Chant”

If you don’t like Harry Potter its nearly finished /thankfully/ due to the poor content and without all the hype to push it along it’ll disappear unlike the dahls and pratchetts.
anyone understand why is it on the News?

Ok, If you love Harry Potter why would you search “I hate Harry Potter” and then read all the opinions?
Later on, I think you will be finding out about the joys of stress induced ulcers …
question. Why is it that Harry Potter can be defended by the argument ‘Its harmless entertainment’ or ‘escapism’ I would no more let my kids read Harry Potter all day, than I would let them watch commercials hours on end.
Given the ability that books have to shape our imagination and outlook I would actually prefer the commercials.
I hate Harry Potter as I think it is making our country (UK) blander and we are celebrating it.
Finally ‘it’s for kids’ ?
because it is simply written? No, it’s badly written.
because it has simple themes? No, children are not simple although they are easily lead.
so are some adults

Harry Potter is a load of overhyped rubbish and before you jump on me yes I have read the books and watched the films, up to now. The books are very badly written and extremely boring, they should make it a form of torture for people to read them. The books are not for children too, they have a clear lack of morality and would appear to teach children more wrong than right. The plots are paper thin a predictable and Rowling is a terrible writer. I know people say that we should not waste time writing if we do not like the books but I feel people should be free to air their views either way. I am not trying to rain on the parade but it has to be said that the extent to which Harry Potter has been elevated is a sham. I find it amazing how Rowling has managed to con so many people into even begining to make positive comments about her work. To be honest with you she is the biggest rip off merchant of all time, the amount of already published work she appears to have just copied and pasted is staggering, it’s like she discovered the original idea of characters etc from some one else and then basically tried to piece a story around it herself with a very sorry outcome. Infact the style of writng in the books would lead me to belive that she did infact steal the whole story from an eight year old child and then just submitted it to publishing houses out of desperation. I have rambled on for too long now so I will leave all of the pathetic people to defend their beloved Harry until one day they may finally wake up and smell the coffee along with the s**t that Rowling has shoveled you.

Harry Potter reminds me of forced consumerism. Something people don’t necessarily want, but are brainwashed by the TV networks/media to submit to and accept. He’s really like the new Barnie Purple Dinosaur. I don’t even think a lot of parents like Harry Potter. Many have told me so. Parents are just forced to take their kids to his movies, buy those mass-produced books. It’s just another way to get the kid out the house & spend money to keep the consumer economy going. Harry Potter ought to be renamed ‘Manipulation Entertainment’. Parents especially, are pressured by the media to buy Harry Potter entertainment as some social directive. It’s quite unlike entertainment that came from the Golden Age of cinema in 1940s/post-war America. It was warm. It had substance. As a kid, it made you feel happy. You could wrap your arms around it. You didn’t think you were spending money on it. It seemed to come to you. Like the readers have said in this forum, today’s Kid’s entertainment like Harry Potter, reek of soulless uninvited consumerism, designed not to entertain or nurture, but to make J.K. Rowling and the movie studies wealthy and wealthier. I have never bought a Harry Potter book or movie and never will. Thank God. Like Barnie before him, people will realize the pure insanity of Harry Pottermania when it’s all over.

Madness!

I don’t understand how people can say HP is boring to read… if its that boring then why are so many people hooked on it? Most people I know can’t put it down! I love the books but not so much the films and I think its very well written. I understand the dislike of the mass consumerism, but that doesn’t stop the books from being fantastic!

There will be people who love such a gigantic success and will be haters. At the end it’s just a book created a big hype. Since the series initiated I never liked the books or the movies. And the fuss about the last book, finally made me build http://www.harrypotterhaters.com . If you want to spit out your hatred or dislike feel free to come in.
Disclaimer: When I say “hate”, it aligns more with “dislike”.

Nick, this is a pretty cool Wordpress site by the way. I liked it.

May have to check out harrypotterhaters later. what i hate about potter is that it’s everywhere, were being so bombarded with these images to the point that any merit these book had as literature are now dystroyed by crass commercialism.

Okay, so I just finished the last book, although I REFUSE to read the lame, predictable, cotton candy epilogue. The thing with all of the books (and movies) for me is that there are things I like and other things that make me want to alternately pull my hair out, scream, and roll my eyes. Yes, I enjoy magic. Unfortunately, the only characters that I really like and have an actual interest in (with the exceptions of Hermione and Dumbledore) are “bad”. Why? Because, as the very first book tells us, Slytherins are evil. Um…doesn’t prejudice go both ways? It’s kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy toward the Slytherins by just assuming that they will all become Death Eaters. God bless Snape for being a complex, grey character. And damn Harry for being a judgemental ass! Exactly how many times has Snape saved his life? Yet, ask Harry at any given time and he’ll tell you that Snape is an evil git and he (Harry) can’t understand why Dumbledore trusts him. Yes, because Harry is so mature and has so much life experience that his judgement is vastly superior to the 100+ year-old wizard. And Draco? Please, for the love of God, write more about him. One major problem with these books is that we’re forced to see everything from Harry’s point-of-view. I admit that Harry has his moments when I like him alright, but those tend to be few and far between. Most of the time I find him to be an arrogant, hypocritical, judgemental, dim-witted brat. He gets to judge Draco at first meeting (let’s not forget that it was RON who first laughed at Malfoy, not the other way around), refuse to take into consideration that anyone has the ability to change, or to revise his opinions on those people, and he breaks rules at every turn and never gets punished for those because he’s Harry Potter (and because he’s got Hermione with him he’s able to defeat the villian-of-the-week). However, since we’re forced to view everything through Harry’s eyes, those characters that have more depth and are vastly more intriguing are reduced to afterthoughts, only being seen when it serves to make Harry right or give him another reason to act superior. Let’s talk about Ron, shall we? What exactly is his point in the books? Harry has the magical power and Hermione is the brains. (In fact, I think that Hermione really should have been the one lauded as a hero throughout the series, not Harry really, since it is because of her that he’s still alive and could do 90% of the things he did). Book after book we’re shown that Hermione and Harry are a team, and together they can solve the mystery and save the day. Ron has contributed what? Oooh ooh I know! He played really great chess in book 1!! Yeah…and he’s a jealous, spiteful, ignorant, prejudiced, immature idiot with an inferiority complex that shows up in every book. He serves no purpose except as a device to give Harry a “family” by having a little sister (who looks DISTURBINGLY like Harry’s mother by-the-way) that Harry can grow up and marry. Excuse me while I vomit here. How contrived is THAT relationship? Who couldn’t predict that the minute we met Ginny? Mmhmm. Thanks, but I like a little more unpredictability in my books. Same goes for Ron and Hermione. Whereas Harry and Ginny is mindnumbingly dull, at least the two of them aren’t completely incompatible. Ron and Hermione on the other hand, though I could see (and feared) that Rowling was going to go that route since book four, I still cannot understand how she came up with that. He’s an idiot whose only passion in life is for feeling inferior, being whiny, and talking about Quidditch. Hermione is a complete book-nerd who is going to want to go to University and study every subject under the sun, then probably run for office so that she can bring about social change. Ron is going to (try) to be a Quidditch player, strive for public recognition above all else because he’ll always be trying to get out of Harry’s and Hermione’s shadows, want to marry young and have 8 babies like his parents did, and would be resentful of Hermione’s accomplishments (of which she will have many). As far as I can tell when reading the books, they can’t stand each other, have nothing in common, and only pretend to get along for Harry’s sake. That’s not sexual/romantic tension. That’s two people who should NOT, I repeat, NOT ever be involved in a relationship. I don’t care what Rowling tries to preach, or the millions of fans in the world shout from rooftops. Rowling CANNOT write romance, and I have no idea why she even tried. Tonks/Lupin - huh? Where the hell did THAT come from? Bill/Fleur? Again, what? Harry wakes up one day and realizes that when he looks at Ginny his stomach feels like there’s a monster inside? Hermione and Ron have been fighting their attraction this entire time, the fact that Ron makes Hermione cry at every turn is irrelevant. Seriously, for someone who has enough of an imagination to create this world of magic, some very promising characters (yes, she ignores them or kills them off, but they are there nonetheless), how in the world does she come up with the two most boring, and the four most contrived relationships that she could possibly create? I get it! See, this way, Ron and Hermione will marry, then Hermione will be a Weasly. This is PERFECT because when Harry marries Ginny he’ll be a part of the family too! Awww…how beautiful! Heaven knows we couldn’t put Harry and Hermione together because then Ginny would be pointless in the books and then Ron would be left out and useless (which he already is). Hermione with Draco? No no no, because he’s Slytherin and evil and he couldn’t possibly see her as anything other than a mudblood! Hmm, wouldn’t that be great character development though? The arrogant pureblood learning that he’s been narrow-minded and shouldn’t blindly listen to his parents? Hermione learning that Slytherins aren’t all “evil” and unredeemable? Harry with Luna? The quirky, loopy girl who is really one of the only people in the books who truly GETS Harry. At least then we wouldn’t be left with a James/Lily redux, and the unhealthy, abusive relationship that is Hermione/Ron. Someone shoot me. Did I really read 7 of these things? Someone point me to the nearest fanfiction sight where those of us that actually have some imagination and depth can be satisfied. Hopefully the 10 year-olds of the world will be satisfied by the trite, vanilla, uber-predictable ending to the series. I most certainly am not!

I totally agree with Jessica - even though I am in no position to give any merit to literature quality of the books. My goal with harrypotterhaters.com is to bring in some satyr and humor to the Harry Potter hype.
Contradictory it is, there are Amazon links on my site to sell Harry Potter books. lol. :)))

I personally like Harry Potter. If people don’t like it, GET OVER IT! Nobody’s forcing you to like it. Having websites and stuff about hating something is really immature.

I think most people in respected liturature circles have a scorn for Harry Potter, as it is, undeniably, nothing more then an overblown children’s fad. sure, it’s not that bad, but it cirtainly is far from even the better children’s books in circulation. Personally, I found it diffucult to get past the incessant ’said Harry’ ’said Hermione’ ’said Whoever’, and of course, like a lot of people, the blatent plagerisim. I’m sorry, but giant spiders and cloaked half-men (dementors)… rings a little too soundly of a certain other fantasy writer (J.R.R. Tolkien) I’m sure was never far from Rowling’s notepad. Overall, HP is, in a word, overated, to the points of the ridiculous, and it’s a sad thing that all that money never went to the story’s orrigional creators, Tolkien and so on, but let her think she’s some writing prodegy if she likes. We all know she ain’t.

Totally agree with hoovermouse here. “Having websites and stuff about hating something is really immature.” .. This is so true :>

Jen managed to sum up every single reason I hate Hatty Potter as an actual person.

Hoovermouse managed to sum up the reasons I find the books dull and insipid.

Harry would be in real life, a most unpleasant person. He’s shallow and a bully. He’s arrogant and petty. He’s a teacher’s pet - a new broomstick as a present from Dumbledore? The only one who treats him normally is Snape, who is given a most unpleasant job as “Resident Asshole and Implied Evil Guy”. He’s a jock - captain of the sports team? Gimmie a break. He uses people - Hermione appears to have no reason to exist besides making potions.

He shows no skill at magic. Oh, he’s okay at most things, but I was disgusted in the 6th book when he becomes great at potions just because he’s lucky enough to get the book. And while it’s not cheating, he sure doesn’t make any attempt to admit to his teacher “Yeah, but I actually did this.” Other than that, it’s a great deal of luck and that inherited scar protecting him.

Oh, and Quidditch makes no sense at all. Why not just have two Seekers fly around looking for the Snitch all of the game, since that’s the only way to end the match. It also seems that the best broomsticks have a distinct advantage over regular broomsticks. A little unfair, methinks. If Rowling wanted the match to be fair everybody would have the same model.

I agree with Michelle. If you hate Harry potter so much why sit here and write a1000 word essay about why her books suck. If you don’t like it that’s fine but you must like it enough to explain why you hate it. also how can you judge harry. he would never bash something that people like so much. I say grow up and long live HARRY POTTER!!!!!!!

listen guys!!.. harry potter is just so childish.. now i being sixteen no doubt like harry potter but indeed there is omething that u will say at the end of the book….it is…urm…urm well for kids.. teenagers like me will prefer dan brown or JRR tolkien. dont misunderstand me… i know tha t rowling is superb but if u do not realise the fact that harry potter is not what it is getiing it will be better….. ok no offense.. jsut oppinion and bye

Whenever I say I don’t like Harry Potter, I’m asked why I expend energy on saying so. After all, I’m not a professional critic. I’m not paid to say why I dislike it.
Because I’m honest.
Maybe I’m not a professional critic but does that mean I’m forbidden from having a negative opinion? Does it mean I can’t dislike something? Of course it does because the leering, pathetic fans feel so dreadfully threatened by anybody who dislikes Harry. Why? He’s made Rowling a millionaire and a famous person too. One would think that would imply I’m wrong.
No, they suspect that they have been brainwashed into loving Harry Potter, that the last two books sucked majorly, that the epilogue is a gigantic steaming pile of crap. Twenty (or so) years later, and EVERYTHING’S GREAT. Everything Rowling led up to in the first five books came through. Harry didn’t meet anybody else he wanted to marry; he hooked up with his childhood sweetheart. So did Ron, despite the lack of realism in the Ron/Herm pairings.

Well the author of the Potter books is certainly not a writer’s writer. Her style is bland, her prose is flat, her dialogue is (at times) stilted and ridiculous, the characters are ripped off from here, there and everywhere, and the plots are clichéd and derivative. As a writer, I can’t stand her writing and I wouldn’t recommend studying anything she has written. I can’t finish the books. Not keen on the characters or the story. I’ve read better. Chronicles of Narnia, for example. Gormenghast. Lord of the Rings etc. Rowling is a pure product of the mass media hype machine of the twenty first century. After every Pop Idol, X-factor, Fame Academy et al, we hear how the winner has broken all sales records and yet it’s a standing joke that these so-called “talents” are rubbish. Except that it isn’t that funny when you’re being force fed this kind of crap. What we’re really seeing with Potter is that Publishers have refined their art.

In ecent so called news JK Rowling herself has stated that she’s tempted to write another so called novel of harry, dear god has this woman finished counting her billions and realised she wants more. Now to prick tease her audience with the temptation of another book as she didn’t make it into the 10 best reads of 2007! Either write it or don’t but what kind of a woman screws with her audience

A good author rewrites, rewrites and rewrites the text, which is going to be published. She didn’t bother to do it in books 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7.

I find it hilarious that people on here seem to be picking holes in the characters in these books. Have you not realised yet that they are fictional? And why are so many of you giving these lengthy explainations of why you hate Harry personally, along with the other characters in the books? They are fictional characters! JK Rowling could turn around and say that it was all a big misunderstanding and really Harry is exactly the way all of you want him to be, and that would be the truth, because she controls his thoughts and actions.
If Harry was the most incredible wizard alive you would all be shouting a raving about how Harry may as well be the only character in the book as it seems he could have finished Voldemort off on his own anyway.

It seems to me that most of you are bitterly jealous because JK Rowling has made billions of pounds and is only 42 years old.

And another thing, why oh why do people keep saying that Harry Potter is a copy of the Lord of the Rings? It isn’t! It just isn’t!!

Oh, you people anger me so much. Did any of you read that Robert Winder (from the BBC) thing about how he hates Harry Potter? That actually made me laugh out loud, especially when he said “The series paints an unrealistic picture of Britain in 2005.”

I don’t think he has quite grasped the fact that the books are set from 1991-1998. I don’t think Robert Winder has actually lived in those “… hang round bus-stops late at night wearing a baseball cap and drinking cider” lives he keeps talking about. Actually, Robert, I prefer to drink straight vodka around the back of the cinema (I’m not joking), and yet I am an enormous Harry Potter fan.

I love Harry Potter. I really, really do.

PS: Hello, my name is Hannah and I’m a 15 year old from the shittiest parts of Essex. You know, the kind of places where kids are stabbed outside blockbuster (that really happened).

I just wanted to say that I (keep in mind I’m 15 too) hated the harry potter books.
They may be fictional but thats no excuse for such horribly flawed characters.
People need to shut up about the series ‘helping kids to read’. The books were amazingly easy and only took a few hours each. So you read crappy writing for about 20- 30 hours, what good does that do? People don’t hate the series out of jealousy of the writer, they hate that harry potter fans are so set on shoving the series down everyones throats that they go so far as to go look for sites of people complaining about the series to argue that it’s not that bad and we should all quit wasting our time complaining. By the way, anyone on here who mentioned it’s a waste of time to complain needs to think about how they came to a site thats anti harry potter to argue about the series. I agree it’s stupid to hate something you’ve never read but the guy did say he tried to read it. In school they do teach you to skim books and read the first few chapters to see if they’re any good. If he did so then he has every right to say that the books are rubbish.

I LOVE HARRY POTTER.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Have you people actually read the books fully?. Please read it completely and then rubbish it. I do not understand why people should commment about things that they do not understand about.

I have indeed read all seven books about said character and I have found them all to be the worst, perhaps an exaggeration but I have such a strong hatred towards J.K. Rowling, books published. I agree with Marion’s comments, I found myself wishing that the main characters would all get killed off so that perhaps, by some extraordinary circumstance, the author would create some half decent likeable characters. But it’s not just the abominable characters that I detest, it is badly written no matter what people say. A story such as this should be a cumulative build of tension and character relationships; instead the method of tension building seems to be: Major Event, Minor Events, Major Event, Minor Events, Major Events, Minor Events, Final Major Event, Conclusion. This method does not aid the plot at all. I am aware that some may say the plot is not about tension but let’s look at it for a moment, the idea of the story is that a powerful and evil mage is returning and the only person capable of stopping him is a naive teenage wizard. Surely the presence of such an evil character is cause for tension in the plot.

Secondly character relationships, I have essentially covered this earlier when I mentioned Marion’s comment earlier, I cannot fault the analysis of the characters at all and whole-heartedly agree with said analysis. The language style is simplistic at best and not entertaining, during scenes that were meant to be exciting I found myself desperate for the intricate writing style of Spot the Dog. I re-read the books several times, determined to find something good to say, but alas I found not one redeeming feature.

Yet this is not even the thing that irritates me the most, I may be able to ignore the childish writing style, the hateful characters and boring plotline were it not for the fact that Rowling has become undeservedly rich, contemptibly famous and worshipped by the troglodytes who believe her work to be good. This is a woman who takes sales away from wonderful writers; there could be many people who have ideas for splendidly intricate plots and fascinating characters. But these good people are shunted aside because the limelight is already full with Rowling and Harry Potter.

In addition it is not just new writers that are overlooked but old ones too, superb classics such as Golding’s “Lord of the Flies”, “Fahrenheit 451″ by Ray Bradbury and the collected works of H.P. Lovecraft. I know the argument that Rowling’s books are for children and some may not find the works, such as those which I have just mentioned, very interesting or easy to read, but children should be encouraged to read good books that will lead them on to better ones, rather than supping at the proverbial teat of Harry Potter. Even more distasteful is the number of adults who read the books, surely fully grown adults have the ability to discern between a good book and the written excrement of Joanne Rowling. But rather than reading good books these adults are more content to become obsessed to the point at which they dress up as characters and wait for days for the new book to be released, however since the series has finished I hope that such practice will no longer occur.

Joanne Rowling, the talentless hack, is poured down the collective throat of human society and I can but hope that one day we will vomit her work out and leave it to die as an empty husk.

Can I just ask - how can you hold such a strong hatred for someone you have never met?

Plus does no one think that if the characters were all perfect, you would be complaining about how unrealistic they are?

Why can’t we all just applaud one woman’s success? I can’t be doing with all this negativity!

Ah, Hannah. Might I ask you a question? Who wastes more time? The person who dislikes the works of J K Rowling, and searches the words “I hate Harry Potter” for an agreeing opinion? Or the person who LOVES the works of J K Rowling, and decides that they would rather like to bicker on a site DEDICATED to how impotent and distasteful the books are?

The thing is, we don’t dislike J K ROWLING. I am certainly not jealous of her skills. Perhaps as a beginner writer (not yet published; not yet applied) I am jealous of how she has ALL THAT MONEY and I don’t have it, but that’s a little obvious, isn’t it?

No, I dislike J K Rowling’s work.

J K Rowling sold BECAUSE she painted an unrealistic picture. Adults read this idealistic tale of back in the 1970s and sighed, “Yes, that was just like it was,” they lied to themselves. Despite the absolute foulness of the real 1970s, the adults reading the books fantasised that it was just like that. Looking back on the ‘good old days’.

For the life of me, I can’t see why anybody with a reading age over 6 and a memory over 20 would want to read Harry Potter. I may not be the best at picking out crapness, but twenty minutes of reading that book almost sent me crazy with Harry’s hero worship, his vast amounts of money, the sheer boredom, and the way you knew that the good guys were going to win. It was like reading Enid Blyton - BAD Enid Blyton. Blyton is packed with 1930s morals - if you’re a good, honest, dull little girl you’ll get along just fine.

Harry Potter is almost the anti-thesis of morals. If you’re rich, and popular, and a teacher’s pet, and lucky, and a martyr, and a bully, and a liar, you’ll get broomsticks, magic maps, friends, girlfriends, a cloak of invisibility that fits two people, put on the school team as the most important player, and everything you ever really wanted.

Harry is a most unpleasant person, fictional or not.

Harley is now my personal hero on this board

Ok back the reality, there now talking about having the next movie in 2 parts. that’s twice the crapness immortalised on film, and once again the author is taking about the “maybe i’ll do a book 8″ Just do it or shut up already. How can you expand the book…follow it from his children point of view who live at Harry Potter hall named for there famous dad. Making them realise after all the talk that’s he basically a tosser

I have read all the Harry Potter books, and so far all I’ve noticed is that the only that happens is people die. Could this be why people love it? It seems to me that these books were Ms. Rowling’s exercise in anger management. When somebody gets her upset, uh-oh, must be time to kill somebody knew. When I first started the books I wondered why she had so many characters that you can’t keep track of them all. Now I realize it’s so she’d have some people left when she got through with the massacre!

For those of you who haven’t been following the news, JKR, has declared war on her biggest fan, who spent 9 years building an online references guide which the author has confessed to using instead of actually re-reading her own work and made sure it won awards for it’s ingenuity because the site is about to be published in book form. Now there must be a good hundred books about there about Potter some creative, some critical. But this author had got there ahead of JKR in writing this book and now she has declared war on a fan and made him cry like a spoiled play ground bully as she weeks ‘I don’t want to cry because I’m British,’, no love if you were British, she would have stayed at home like a normal person instead of deliberately creating drama for yourself. Seriously this woman really makes me sick but finally the rest of the world is waking up to this, she bleats on about the millions she has helped raise for charity, even though she sits ion a personal fortune on a billion dollars, if she’s so concerned about charity a good 10percent of her fortune wouldn’t go amidst.
At times, she claimed, Vander Ark showed ‘utter laziness’ in copying her creations and had ‘plundered’ her own guides Quidditch Through the Ages, and Fantastic Beasts’, yeah and that; s why you lauded glory over him this time last year and thanked him for his devotion to you. She’s so confident to of her own importance that apparently in court today The judge presiding over the Harry Potter trial to decide if a publisher stole JK Rowling’s copyright has said that an encyclopedia to explain the “gibberish” would be handy. A cloud descended over her face and saw a flash of anger. Miss Rowling, who is now worth more than £500million, was a struggling single mother when she wrote the first Harry Potter book in longhand in an Edinburgh cafe. This woman makes me sick, from the initial bleating of the “I lived in a poor council flat, with asbestos on the wall, and rats nibbling on my feet,” No. in reality it was a nice 2 bedroom cottage, near her well off sister, near her well off parents all paid for by the taxpayer. This woman tries to sell herself as something out of Oliver Twist, when she was a middle class, university educated, traveled the world type of girl. Indirectly insulating her audience when she claimed to have sobbed as she brought rompers for her baby daughter in Oxfam, like millions have before her, including my own parents. Perhaps the cottage was in her mind like the council estates in her mind since it must have been a million miles away from her Enid Blyton childhood
The best ending to this is that yesterday JK Rowling fought back tears yesterday as she told a New York judge what Harry Potter means to her.

A shed load of money is all as she lost her integrity as a writer a long time away, when she reduced people to tears with your self righteousness and bullying tactics.

In my opinion, JK writes the way I used to write fiction when I was eleven. I thought my stuff was fab untill a few years later and I cringed! (passive voice, words repeated over and over, adjectives galore…)
I think it’s odd to see writing I would have strived to improve get JK so much money. I also think she wrote the last book the same way I write essays; lots of glitter and filler. Great for getting marks and a decent word count, but not a good read for enjoyment.

She strikes me (JK) as someone who cannot critique their own writing, or at least her fans won’t.

Dissagree?

Oh Wijjpip, your writing would be so much better if you kept your sentences at a sensible length. I’m not an expert by any means, but if you want to write a convincing argument - especially one that considers the talent and worth of another writer and her books - you simply have to take more care. For example:

“Secondly character relationships, I have essentially covered this earlier when I mentioned Marion’s comment earlier, I cannot fault the analysis of the characters at all and whole-heartedly agree with said analysis.”

What a mess. Your sentences go on for miles. You say earlier twice in the second sentence. The said in “said analysis” is wholly unnecessary, and you use “have” instead of “had”. This would be a lot better if you changed it to the following:

“Secondly, character relationships. I had essentially covered this earlier when I mentioned Marion’s comment. I cannot fault the analysis of the characters at all and I whole-heartedly agree with it.”

Now go and apply the above to everything you’ve ever written! GO! QUICKLY! Good luck, old chap!

In response to what Barry said, Wijjpip’s writing did seem a bit overwritten, but that’s not what’s on trial here. It seems to me that if anything is overwritten, it is indeed the Harry Potter books.
As for what C.U said about JK Rowling’s writing, that’s probably the most intelligent thing I’ve heard about these books in a long time. I’ve never read anyone’s work that used so many words to say so little, with the possible exception of Charles Dickens and William Shakespeare. I must say I’m not fond of either of them, but at least you can learn to respect some one with talent, not a billionaire writer who only seems interested in writing something that will make her money, not in writing something’s worth something to the literary world.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to go off the point there!

I’d like everybody to take a deep breath here. This site is not dedicated to disliking JK Rowling, however rich she has become. It’s dedicated to disliking Harry Potter.

Now, I’ve spent a long time saying how Dumbledore looked like an idiot for saying how Snape’s not that bad.

I’d also like to say, remember that post where I predicted that in the last book, Snape and Voldie would die, and I guessed that Snape would pull a good guy turn? See how I was right? That’s how predictable Rowling is.

And Snape died. Straight after redeeming himself, I’m told, because I haven’t read the 7th book. I’m sure I will sooner or later, don’t you worry. It’s bound to be unbearable. And Snape died. That’s not a twist. A twist would be him living and him and Harry making up.

You know something else? The entire Weasley family. They exist purely so that Ron has a good big family. You hardly learn anything about any of them, ever. Just Ginny and Ron, and a bit about the Twins.

There are so many vacant, pointless characters and we learn nothing about what they do. Their lives revolve around Harry.

Harry is like a male version of Rowling, too. He starts with his life all sucky (a million times worse than hers was, but that’s what happens) and becomes so happy and rich. He’s what Rowling wanted to be when she wrote him, although admittedly being rich and having vengenace on those who wronged you is not an uncommon desire. When I’m writing my book and doing a fight scene, I just think of all the eyes of the bullies I want to gouge out a bit and it all comes ninjaing out.

For those who think the Houses are equal, ALL the Gryffindors stayed for the final battle. ALL the Slytherins left. The other two houses were inbetween. And remember that song of the hat? An entire verse each was devoted to Gryffindor and Slytherin, while the other two houses were lucky to get a whole line to themselves.

“Hufflepuff is the sucky house, everybody says so,
And Ravenclaw I don’t know a thing about but uh… I’m given to understand… uh… average and dull?”

Harry Potter is such a Mary Sue. Yes, I know he’s canon now that there’s published books, but if there weren’t, and he was played as an Original Character in a fanfic, personality totally intact, he’d be recognised as a total Mary Sue. He’s mean to everybody, and nobody says a word against him except the bad guys. Not even the people who should be standing up for both sides. He’s so totally popular. He’s got a cool scar. He’s AMAZINGLY SKILLED at Quidditch even after just one match. He gets the girl he wanted. He’s so lucky that he gets Snape’s old potion book and then he gets the potion of luck. He’s based on what Rowling wants, believes and some of her history with magic thrown in.

No wonder so many fanfic writers end up turning into a Canon Sue. He was a Mary Sue in the freaking BOOKS.

And I thought I hated the Books….. Wow. I was about 10 when I first read books 1,2,&3; and I must confess that I loved them at the time, even when the 4th book came out, I still thought it was pretty good…. then did not read the rest until last year. I am now 20, and by god, I cannot stand any book after no.3! The first three to me have a childish nostalgia and are relatively inoffensive in their brevity. They are the only ones that seem to be children’s books. The unwieldy later tomes are purely quantity over quality, and have way too high a body count and unnecessary violence for a children’s book, while not being as dark as I would personally like.
Much has been said about the annoying adjectives etc, of Rowling’s writing style, but the thing which frustrates me most about her is her description. Hogwarts castle is merely ‘..a vast castle with many turrets and towers’ . Amazing. I have to admit that I am an artist, and hence think in pictures, but it shows that Rowling never does. There is no real sense of place other than the barely necessary and the bleeding obvious, and many things are just downright silly if you try to draw them. I know that too much atmosphere and description is just as bad as the total lack thereof, but I pity the production designers for the movies.
Another thing is the distain with which all the wizard characters treat normality. Why no databases? No communications? I find the old-fashioned nature of the ‘wizard world’ unbearably annoying. Ever heard of a gun or a bomb, you idiots? O.K., it might not finish off the tiring and unimaginatively lame villain, but good luck to Harry surviving a bullet through the skull. If Voldemort made a habit of carrying a gun, we would not have had to endure the last three books.
And as for Harry himself… HE IS AN EMO TURD WHO CUTS HIMSELF AND WARES HIS FRINGE OVER HIS EYES!!!!!!! (‘caps lock’ of rage). Maybe not exactly, but he is such a Nancy boy. Its not like his life is too perfect or anything, and nor is he, but the ‘imperfections’ only serve to make him more hateable: I can stand arrogance if there is actually something to be arrogant about.
I am in the early stages of writing my first novel, and I find that the Potter books are a great source of negative inspiration: when something annoys you sooooo much that you feel compelled to do the opposite or do the same better. It worked for Tolkien with Shakespeare’s Macbeth.

as always jkr had jumped on the bandwagon ans as before will eventually make out it was all her idea to begin with like everything else. pulled from imdb

Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling has joined rival fantasy writer Philip Pullman’s campaign to block publishers’ plans to introduce age guidance limits on books.

Pullman, who penned the His Dark Materials trilogy from which the 2007 film The Golden Compass was adapted, is at the forefront of a group of authors and illustrators who are all unhappy about the scheme.

The new guidelines would see children’s books stamped with age limits, in a similar way guidance ratings are given to movies.

And now Rowling is the latest recruit to slam the proposed move, alongside children’s literature giants Quentin Blake, Anne Fine and Dame Jacqueline Wilson.

Pullman explains his decision to boycott the move: “You simply can’t decide who your readership will be. Nor do I want to, because declaring that it’s for any group in particular means excluding every other group.”

me thing it’s because her books would probably be graded for anyone under the age of 10 for there content

I’ve read the books many, many times. But as the series progressed I found that I really didn’t like Harry. Fictional or no, a character needs to be liked to be a ‘hero’. My favourite characters in the books are the Malfoys and Snape. My least favourite characters are Harry and Dumbledore. Both are arrogant know it alls.

Every time I read Half Blood Prince I cringe at the way Harry speaks to Narcissa Malfoy in Madame Malkins. Is this really the way you speak to an adult who has never done you any harm. Oh but wait - it’s Harry Potter. The boy who lived to be rude to everyone.

If J K Rowling had been a truly good author she could’ve given her characters some three dimensional shape by having them change. She did not.

If you want to read a similar series where the characters learn and grow then try Eoin Colfer’s Artemis Fowl series. Artemis Fowl starts life as very similar to Draco Malfoy, but his author gives him room to adapt and learn.

Harry Potter never learns a thing in the whole series of seven books. He just gets more and more arrogant as the series progresses.

I prefer to read fan fiction - the writers of Harry Potter fan fiction have so much more imagination than Ms Rowling. And in fan fiction characters can grow and learn.

From book one we see the 11 year old Draco Malfoy treated with disdain and arrogance by people like Ron and Hagrid - who should know better - because he’s ‘in Slytherin’. In Book 7 we see Ron with the self same attitude which he used against Malfoy at first meeting, at his first sight of 11 year old Scorpius Malfoy. Plus we have him encouraging his children to behave in the same way.

The Wizarding World went through two World Wars - and ended up with exactly the same failed system as that which started the rise of Voldemort in the first place. But apparently in Harry Potter world it is fine to sneer at Pure Bloods, but not fine for them to dislike this and react according to muggle borns.

Harry and his friends inability to grow and change means the whole series is pointless.

I’ve been wondering a few things. 1: what is the point in killing people like, say, Dumbledore when all ‘Arry Potty has to do is go and find a painting of said person and chat away with them? 2: What did they do with all these dead bodies laying around after the final battle? Did they sell their body parts on the black market, or just plant them out back and use them as fertilizer to grow their magic crap? I reread the last few chapters and actually started laughing, because I just got this picture of them carrying everybody out back and tossing them in great big stacks like bricks. The books are kind of funny if you look at them from the right point of view.

One of the things that annoys me about the potter franchise is the fans telling us that the books must just be too difficult for us and that we can’t be too bright if we go off and actually enjoy something more adult, with a better title character. I laugh though, when people sneer at stuff from Ursula lee guin and T.Pratchett and say they ripped off JK, because of course, she invented fantasy, nay, literature itself. as as for people being jealous of all those riches she’s got, i doubt anyone would mind if she passed a grand or two on to us.

you guys won’t believe this, my best friend who works at an airport just called me and told me this. Today a certain actress who is the only lead female and who needs to be saved to become Harry’s best mate came through and snubbed her fans when they came up to her and asked her for an autograph. What kind of person says that to little kids…uhhh ego’s like that make me sick

Haha, indeed Barry my writing was rather dis-organized during my rant. I’m afraid when i get angry about something it does tend to impair my ability to function. However i would like to thank Anne for making the point that my writing is not on trial here but that of Miss Rowling. I would like to add that i am naturally averse to child protagonists in novels such as these because i find the idea that a child could overcome a powerful antagonist to be foolish. In addition, Rowling continually insists that the reason the protagonist wasn’t killed as a baby was because of his mother’s love. I’m afraid i can’t remember if there was another reason for this because it has been a long while since i read any of them, and unlikely that i ever will again. However is she saying that no other person loved their family enough? Also the protection of love is a cliche that is really over-used.

first off, i love how long this thread has been going on for, seriously, i have no idea who’s blog this is, it just popped up in a search, ha!
I’ve got to say I’m not one for hype, but I’m proud to say that I’m an avid Harry Potter fan (HELL YEAH) because I first read it in 1997. When the second came out, I bought it on the day of release, and on the third, I was amazed to see a crowd of people flocking around dressed as wizards, wanting to buy Prisoner of Azkaban just as soon as I did. Admitadly I was a cool little pre-teen, but even so, it was nice to know that I’d got into it without the hype and publicity around it (which i know makes me sound like one of these pathetic “I liked them BEFORE they were popular!” indie kids or something, but ho-hum).
I guess what I’m getting at is that there are plently of people, like myself who like these books simply because of the story, so much so that it’s become iconic, perhaps even a part of british culture. I’m not saying Harry Potter is the greatest literary work of all time or anything, just that there is some underlying basis to the hype.
oh, and “Wijjpip” (?) Try to sound a bit MORE precocious would you? Jeez. Besides, to put my Harry Potter swot cap on, it’s only because Voldemort, who has no apreciation of love, tried to kill Harry directly, that Harry’s mother’s sacrifice actually had any impact. I agree it’s a horrible cliche, but I like how it’s turned around that Dumbledore and Harry, who pride themselves in being adverse to Voldemort so much that in their attempts to have as much “LOVE” (what a fantastic oppurtunity for gay dumbledore jokes) that they have blind trust in their friends. And that of course works out great because Sirius gets killed because of it, which forces us to see Dumbledore’s trust towards Snape, and even Hagrid, in a different light, especially after Snape goes and kills him and all.
Anyroads, I’m rambling to a bunch of strangers, sorry

ok, I’m ranting again but i really dont care.
“Kate”?! god, you really HAVE read the book havn’t you? I mean, seriously, have you?
Although Harry Potter isn’t the greatest protagonist, he is at least relatable, for a number of reasons, prime amongst them in my opinion; he is flawed, leading the narrative along his own opinions which are not essentially shared by the reader, and, that his aleigances lie with those against prejudice!
I accept that towards throughout the book, Harry and Hagrid in particular do tend to show bias towards outcasts, and shun those that have conflicitng views, but this is understanable. Harry, after all has been victimised his entire life by his own family, then hailed as a hero against his will. Hagird grew up labelled a freak, as has been deemed a monster after being unjustly accused of attacking his fellow students (which, coincidentaly, is what the Malfoys hope to repeat). All the characters that stand against the status quo are perfectly entitled to, in my eyes; each of them has reason to reject the “pure blood” ideology” as, particularly in Hermione’s case, they should.
Besides, the “pure bloods” as you call them; the Malfoys and so forth, can’t all be grouped under this catagory surely? Voldemort’s mentality, that they so desperately uphold has been famed by a half blood, and as the Weasleys notably point out, is not shared by ALL pure blooded wizards.
FURTHERMORE (yeah. i WENT there) as an obective outsider to the magical world, Harry’s only real basis of influence is Hagrid, who merely tells him about Voldemort’s rein of terror, and the supporters who followed him. This causes Harry to see that not all witches and wizards will be as friendly as Hagrid, the only one he yet knows. He initially reacts against Malfoy after HIS disrespect to his mother and father, and the way he insults muggle borns. This, taken out of context, is surely reason enough to be at least disdainful towards a person? A brat that says anyone who isn’t born into the right circles is beneath him. Really, correct me if I’m wrong?
The Malfoys continue to a bane, attempting to have Harry expelled, trying to remove Dumbledore for protecting his students, making Ginny get posessed, trying to kill the D.A, supporting Dolores Umbridge, I mean, come on, anyone who assoiciates themselves with THAT, it’s a pretty blatant sign something is wrooong.
Seriously, you must be joking if you say that it’s worng for a narrative to sneer at people who sneer undeservadly? What has Dumbledore ever shown to any character, but fairness and humility, even Voldemort at times!
If you’re trying to be one of those “I LOVE YOU DRACO!” Harry Potter fans, first off, it’s sad enough to like Harry Potter in the first place, but sadder to try and be ironic to support the other side. Secondly, the only reason people like that, tend to like Harry Potter books in the first place, is to try and be different and ironic. When they realise that there actaully are some really immature nerds, such as myself, who geniunly like it for what it’s worth, they try and distance themselves from even them by taking another step to the “my favourite character is draco malfoy” stage.
If that’s you, then COOOOL GIRL.
if not, then I look like a pretty special guy, ha.

Harry? Flawed? Nooo, really?
The thing about Harry is, as “flawed” as the little twerp is, he’s unrealistically flawed. I just don’t find it believable.
I don’t think there’s really anything wrong with a person’s favorite character being Draco Malfoy. Some of us just like to see the twerp get taken down a notch or two.
Also, I’d like to say that as immature as it might be to have something as big as this going on and on about how we hate Harry Potter, how much different is it from having some place where people are going on and on about how much they like the books?

You know, I think the whole orphan plot has been used way too many times now, child protagonists are grating on me in general now, and harry is a bad example of both a heartwarming orphan (more like sickly) and a chosen hero, which he sucks at.

I challenge any writers out there to make fantasy characters who have parents and don’t always follow those bloody prophecies to the letter! (Got sick of prophecies after reading the Belgaraiad). Bit off point, nevermind.

Oh, and I agree with Ann, wouldn’t it be nice to see Harry get the slap he deserves?

JK Rowling went seriously out of her way to make Harry hate Voldemort. Kill his parents. Kill his godfather. Kill his headmaster-friend. Kill the guy who was protecting him secretly. All excuses for vengeace. If Harry was female I bet she’d have thrown in ‘rape’, just in case we didn’t think he was angsty enough. Except of course he’s a boy and boys can’t be raped.

And seriously. I know all books need a star, but when there’s only one star, and all the other characters are background detail to that star… well it sucks.

Also, the epilogue. What a way to say “It ends this way, I said so, and the future doesn’t involve more danger, just glee.”? I’d say Hogwarts is aged about secondary school. And when you do have a boy/girlfriend in secondary school, is it really realistic that you marry them and become old? No. You generally remain friends, and eventually lose contact and make new friends and so on. But oh no, Rowling can’t be bothered to write any more books explaining how he met this new person and made new friends. Or suggest that the people you ‘love’ when you’re 15 aren’t going to be the people you love when you’re 30. Even when they’re the same people.

Then again, Harry’s so obnoxious I can’t say I’m surprised he didn’t make any new friends. He seems to think people are obligated to want him as a friend.

I’ll tell you what would be cool. College Harry. Going through puberty, looking up skirts, analising girls breasts. Real world stuff combined with a world that’s magic. Sex doesn’t go away just because you zap it with a wand.

That’s the problem with this book. Grab a magic wand and ZAP! All your problems go away.