Why do people say Rowling is a good writer

Fuck my friend brings me to this channel full of people who treat the Harry Potter series like they're important modern literature.  And when told that J.K. Rowling is a poor writer, they say shit along the lines of "in comparison to who? Shakespeare!?"

And Jesus, older kids and adults who treat them like they're not children's books.  A friend of mine met a young girl who told her that she "reads mature books, like Harry Potter."

>>40

I don't know, in a lot of cases, they're actually worse than the older classics. 

Not all the time, but I've never seen a world as detailed as Tolkien's.  I've never had a series that made me wonder about what mankind would really be like in 20,000 years like *Dune*. 

The some and total of JKR's world is "Take bits of British culture and BS some fantasy elements around them."  A lot of things are silly just beneath the surface.  Why enslave magical creatures to dig in your garden and make your dinner when you can do so by magic?  If you can appear *anywhere* by either portkey or floo powder (neither of which actually require the user to cast a spell), why do students take *trains* to Hogwarts?

At least in Tolkien, he managed to keep his magical abilities consistant.  Magic could only be done by highly trained wizards, so it made sense to see people travel by horse, or plow a field. 

And really, the some and total of the moral question is simple good and evil.  Harry never doubts that he'll stop voldy, he never questions it, and so on.  He's basicly the Cloud Strife of the fantasy novel world.  He just wants to get Sephiroth, and it's all possible because he's the hero. 

Muaddib was somewhat of a better hero -- he's somewhat afraid of his gift.  Sure he's supposed to be a messiah, but all he wants to do is avoid the disaster he knows is coming.  He fulfills prophecies even, not because he's the zomg hero, but because he's trying to avoid a disaster he feels is coming.  In later novels, he tries to undo his own cult. 

JKR doesn't have that kind of meat in the story.

lol

Oh you faggot, it doesnt matter if its "amazing literature" its just a good story.


Also, needs moar luna.

>>40
>>40
>>40
>>40
>>40

This

>>41
 Regardless of how classic LOTR is, I thought it was boring as hell when I was reading it. Dune? I don't know, sometimes it was a little tedious. I think all that matters is that a piece is enjoyed. My writing professor thinks Shakespeare is the most boring crap ever even though he's charged with presenting the canon to us. Just because people pronounce something a classic, doesn't necessarily mean it will be automatically enjoyable.

>>41
About the assualt on JK's world......The reason why some things aren't done there(I.E: magicking dinner) is because of rules and laws. When you create a world, there are usually rules(even if they aren't expressed to your audience as they so often aren't.) for how things do and do not work. Maybe they can't magick dinner for the same reason why they can't just create food out of nowhere. There are stories I consider good where things like that aren't explained because they aren't important. As far as the whole hero thing.......there is only one hero story. It's always the hero against something(god, nature, himself, another character) and it's almost always going to be cliche in that respect. Maybe the scenery is different and the characters new, but it's all basically the same. Tolkien did not invent this story. What can differ is the way the story is told. I think a good author can make you give a shit about the story and it's characters and even that is subjective depending on who you're speaking with.

god, that woman needs a thesaurus

She's a pretty good writer actually. She knows how to build up suspense and has a good sense of mystery.

Good storytelling skills but rather drab writing style. There's a difference, you know.

>>49

Yeah, but it doesn't seem to matter much. Usually good storytelling=enjoyable read.

>>47
seconded

The books are great because damn near everyone can enjoy them to some degree, not because JK is an amazing writer. Her characters are well-developed and the books are uplifting; perfect pop literature.

At least it's a fuckton better than Eragon. Seriously, I piss blood thinking about THAT pile of shit.

>>50
Signed, I'd take a book with good storytelling and good characters before a "perfected" writing style any day.