A lot of people point out that it doesn’t make any sense that Harry and Ron didn’t like their schoolwork. Well I figured out why:
It’s because the magic system is just as boring in-universe as out of universe. It doesn’t make any sense in universe either. Harry and Ron realised Rowling’s magic system kinda stinks way before we did, because they spent all day learning it.
If Sanderson had been writing Harry Potter, then Harry and Ron would have liked learning magic as much as Hermione did (Also, Sanderson actually DID write a book about a super-school, it’s called Skyward, it’s good)
Stories don’t have to have “hard” magic systems to be good. I’m a big fan of the magical realism popular in Latin American fiction - where the magic is ambiguous and never quite explained at all.
The problem is the way that Rowling uses magic.
Rowling was clearly writing mystery novels, while lifting a lot of ideas for her setting from like The Worst Witch series. She uses magic spells like a Checkhov’s gun kind of thing, usually establishing whatever magical principle will save the day earlier in the novel. With a relatively self contained story, it works really well. Prisoner of Azkaban is one of her stronger books - the way that she sets up the mystery with the time turner as well as the stuff with Sirius Black, etc - because it’s very “clean” in this way. She introduces a bunch of new elements to her world, but they are all tied around supporting her story. This is good writing.
The problem is that Harry Potter books don’t work as an overarching story. It is abundantly clear that the Horcruxes and Deathly Hallows were not planned from the beginning. Rowling got to the last two books, realized that she needed to write some kind of ending, and then completely drove her plot off the rails.
You could say because she didn’t have an established magic system, it made it easier to drive off the rails, but really, it’s more that she’s competent at writing stand alone mystery novels (which really, that’s what books 1-4 are and they’re the best in the series for it) and not larger narratives. She doesn’t know how to convey the scope of a war, she doesn’t know how to tie together an Epic fantasy.
Yeah, hard magic is not necessary. It’s like “fit living and exercise” is conceptually easy, but the majority of people aren’t really that fit and certainly not Olympic level athletes etc.
Magic could be a combination of luck, genetics, and ability to stick to it and study. THOSE can be hard for a lot of people in practice, but in concept easy at a lot of levels.
It’s abundantly clear the ending of book 1 wasn’t even planned. Harry Potter doesn’t even work when you look at each book individually. Even by YA standards.
I rank them 3>2>4>1>5>7(w/out epilogue)>6>7
I think the ending of the first book was planned, just clumsily executed. It’s a mystery novel - she places all of these red herrings/misdirection. The reveal that Snape was actually saying a counter course with the flying bludger incident is “cute” and goes with the muddled messages and themes she has around that character.
She knew where she wanted to get to, it’s just one of the more “Idiot Ball” driven plots of the series (along with the fifth book). Harry does stupid impulsive shit because that’s his character, and the world just has to react to it. Harry logic isn’t normal people logic, so by the end of the story we’ve kinda lost track of the plot.
It’s no Earthsea but it’s serviceable paperback detective fiction for children.
third year was my favorite as well; it was easily the most compelling story and makes the death of Sirius that much more painful in 6
I think that’s a very apt way to put it.
I’ve had friendships end over basically that statement.
The series is pleasant to read. It’s no different than reading a Tom Clancy or John Grisham or Colleen Hoover novel, just targeted at a younger audience. The fandom culture around it was fun - especially for those of us who essentially “grew up” with Harry by being roughly the same age as him at each release.
Not every novel needs to be Pale Fire or JR.
It is objectively poorly written and poorly constructed. That’s not really up for debate. The idea that it’s acceptable for small children is it’s only saving grace. Any adult who likes it is blinded by nostalgia or has built a personality around it.
I “grew up” with it. I read them as they came out as I was about the age. It was known to be slop for children back then.
It’s not a binary from bad to acceptable. There’s A LOT of range in YA books and a lot of good ones. Rowlings issue is so fundamental it really would prevent her from writing any kind of book. She simply packed the knowledge about writing to do any amount of planning ahead. She’s constantly pulling out a McGuffin and insulting the intelligence of her readers. There’s no thought put into the world. The characters don’t come to life. It has the sensibility of Willy Wonka and the set design by Tim Burton. Her writing is closer to a single stream of consciousness than a deliberate plot because she lacked, and probably still lacks, the literary skill or expertise to actually craft that.
Her success is entirely due to factors outside her control and is in spite of her characteristic lack of ability.
Also; Tom Clancy sucks. In fact, Tom Clancy <<< Clive Cussler- and Cussler is mediocre at best.