Terry Pratchett doesn't like JK Rowling

[reveal]

Actually, where does Rowling make her comments about fantasy?

In the Time article I linked to in post #32 above.

 

[PaulKemp]

Here's a question: Have the sales of fantasy novels increased since the HP books became popular? Are people who didn't read fantasy prior to HP suddenly grabbing books they had never heard of because they like the genre?

They have increased markedly if you include the Potter books in the "fantasy novels" category.

Seriously, that's a good question and I doubt anyone knows the answer. Still, it seems reasonable to think that at least *some* HP fans who otherwise would not bother with a fantasy title might leapfrog from HP into other fantasy titles. It happened that way for me -- elementary school teacher recommended The Hobbit, I found I enjoyed tripping the light fantastic, and moved on to Moorcock, Leiber, et al.

 

[Desdichado]

It's no more or less "much ado about nothing" than is virtually every other thread on ENWorld. [...] I was just disappointed by the interviewer's sweeping statement, which IMO evidenced a good deal of ignorance of the genre.

Well, that's why I think it's much ado about nothing. Fantasy fans are feeling slighted when the comments, placed in context, probably are not any more insulting than Rowlings saying she doesn't much like the fantasy genre, or at least her impression of what it is (which seems to be an ignorant--or at least outdated--impression.)

So she doesn't like that type of traditional fantasy. Whoop-de-doo. Neither do a lot of people. That's no skin off my back, even though I do like a great deal of it. Although, frankly, I agree with Rowlings in one respect; I took her comments on "subverting the fantasy genre" as taking some elements of the fantasy genre and doing something non-traditional with them. It was a bit of a too-grand claim to say she's doing something really unique there--I think authors have been "subverting" traditional fantasy conventions for decades, but a lot of my favorite stuff is just that type of "subverted fantasy" rather than cliched, traditional fantasy.

Again, all her comments indicate, in context, IMO, is that she's not very aware of where the fantasy genre is in general these days and she's not a big fan of fantasy cliches, so she's using fantasy elements in non-cliched ways. The fact that she thinks that she's doing something really unique or unusual just betrays her ignorance of the genre, not any type of malicious agenda against it.

 

[reveal]

Seriously, that's a ood question and doubt anyone knows the answer. Still, it seems reasonable to think that at least *some* HP fans who otherwise would not bother with a fantasy title might leapfrog from HP into other fantasy titles. It happened that way for me -- elementary school teacher recommended The Hobbit, I found I enjoyed tripping the light fantastic, and moved on to Moorcock, Leiber, et al.

I don't think it's that ood of a question.

I've heard people say that JKR has pushed fantasy to the forefront of literature and has helped the cause of literacy amongst children. But is that really how it is? True, a lot of kids read her books but has that evolved into the same children picking up some non-HP fantasy books? If so, and I'm sure some have, how has that translated into sales of these books? I'm just curious.

 

[PaulKemp]

I don't think it's that ood of a question.

I've heard people say that JKR has pushed fantasy to the forefront of literature and has helped the cause of literacy amongst children. But is that really how it is? True, a lot of kids read her books but has that evolved into the same children picking up some non-HP fantasy books? If so, and I'm sure some have, how has that translated into sales of these books? I'm just curious.

All right, you!

All my books were published after the HP phenomenon was well under way, so I don't have any personal before and after data. Too, all my novels are set in the Forgotten Realms anyway, which is a bit of a sub-category of a sub-genre of a genre, and I doubt too many HP fans go directly from HP to FR. No doubt some go from HP to D&D though, which might eventually lead them to the FR setting, which might eventually lead them to the novels.

All those eventuallys make me sad.

 

[Kapture]

The author of the Time article was fatuous and rather nasty. Come on, Lewis a Death Eater? It doesn't matter how churchy he is (and I'm fairly un-churchy myself), I think he took an interesting and proactive stance both in how he wrote about people, and belief, and in how he thought about the value of imagination in children.

Pratchet is a fantasy author, hangs out at cons, knows the fans. More importantly, knows many of the authors. I think I heard him say at a reading that he didn't sell the movie rights to his books because he's rich enough as is. I don't think his objection to the Time article is about insecurity. It's about Rowling's insincerity, which is really glaring, and her interviewers total lack of a grasp on the genre which he is criticizing. I can only imagine that he finds it vaguely annoying that a lot of good writers are ignored by the press when they fawn over one writer who's a gauranteed attention getter.

Rowling is pretty conflicted about her work. I personally think that's because she's had a very atypical career for a fantasy writer, or a writer in general. Not many real people, or real writers, have her kind of rags to riches career: three books and bang, straight to the top of the charts. As she's quoted at the end of the time article (and I'm paraphrasing): I could write something horrible after Harry, and people would still buy it. It doesn't surprise me that she fusses about the genre lable. Like it or not, genre is a qualitative judgement for a lot of people. If she's not sure her work is her best, I suspect she's even more leery of other people dismissing it with the "wrong" lable.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Rowling is a blowhard and I think Pratchett is right on the money with his comments about her. I'll take Stephen King's The Dark Tower Trilogy over her Harry Potter books any day of the week and twice on Sunday, and I won't even bother with the next Harry Potter movie, let alone taint my brain by reading her tripe.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

(G.C. points wand at WhisperFoot)

Stupefy

 

[sniffles]

I had a professor who called Harry Potter the literary phenomenon of the century.

I may have had an A in her class, but I dropped right after that.

Well, your professor had a point. Not that it's the phenomenon of the century (which century? and I hate that kind of claim anyway), but that it is a phenomenon. Which, despite the usual usage, does not necessarily mean a good thing.

 

[Ranger REG]

(G.C. points wand at WhisperFoot)

Stupefy

Like THAT would make it any different.

I'm sorry but I'm not taking sides on this one. Terry Pratchett can say what he wants to say about JK Rowling and Ms. Rowling can say what she wants to say about not knowing much about the fantasy genre as much as we enthusiastic fantasy fans know aside from fairy tales (even I personally do not consider them fantasy despite having witches & dwarves in the Snow White story).

If you guys want to duke it out, go ahead. But I get to punch the winners. Hehehe.