?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Comments

( 10 comments — Leave a comment )
mastergode
Jul. 31st, 2005 05:12 pm (UTC)
Pratchett is awesome. And there's a large degree of truth to what he said.

As big a fan as you are of the Harry Potter books, that doesn't make Rowling the best person in the world.

Shit, I loved all the books that I've read by L. Ron Hubbard, but the guy was still a fucking weirdo.

That's one of the reasons why I dislike Harry Potter, personally... Everyone's like, "OMG, best books EVAR!", and I've read tons of stuff that's so less well-known, and so much better. I really feel that it does detract from the recognition that other authors really deserve.

There are some people writing some really good stuff out there, and it gets mostly ignored. As it is, it's mildly annoying. But if I were Pratchett, who writes tons and tons of fantasy books, is very good at it, and makes his living writing books that aren't what you'd called 'traditional' fantasy, I'd be pretty pissed about everyone totally ignoring my stuff.

So, yeah.
thisgirliknow
Jul. 31st, 2005 05:22 pm (UTC)
You're right that there's a degree of truth to what he said, but you're talking to one of the people who has never read a fantasy book better than HP (I mean this in the "its my favorite" way, not the "I don't read fantasy" way). I'm not saying Rowling is the only author ever, but she's definitely in my top 5.. and I think she deserves all the recognition she gets. She gets it because people love her books. Because a large percentage of people love her books, she gets a lot of recognition for it. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. If more people liked Pratchett's books, he would have more of a fan base.

Why do people ignore something or dislike it just because everyone else likes it? Everyone breathes air. Does that mean it's bad or overused? That just because its a trend it must be horrible?
mastergode
Jul. 31st, 2005 07:32 pm (UTC)
On the opposite side of the same coin, just because lots of people like something doesn't make it good.

People watch The O.C., but that doesn't mean it's any good.

People don't always like the things that are actually good... They like the things that are easy. They like things that they don't have to think about.

That's why authors like Pratchet are miffed, because critically, their books are much better than Rowlings, but they get left behind because people only want what's easily digestible.
thisgirliknow
Jul. 31st, 2005 07:42 pm (UTC)
well then you have to define "better"

generally, economically, something is described as "better" if more people like it.
mastergode
Jul. 31st, 2005 08:01 pm (UTC)
Better:

Possessing qualities that go above and beyond those demonstrated by other works in a similar genre; outstanding in some form.

The difference between Shakespeare and Daniel Steele. They both write romances, but one is clearly better than the other.
aoibhinn
Jul. 31st, 2005 09:36 pm (UTC)
I agree with you. There are so many similar works (especially stuff like "His Dark Materials") that are getting swept under the rug because people can't get enough Potter, and instead of going to other, similar books, as one should do when they find a genre they like, the people that eat up HP just demand more HP.

I'm not a fan of the books though. I'm a big snob of syntax.
nikita9041
Jul. 31st, 2005 11:58 pm (UTC)
So totally true
Ok so I am not a HP fan and Im not really a big prachett fan but I have read some of his work.. I find that it is true that people like things that are easy to understand. The purpuse of reading is to think. If you wanted to zone out and get by with little to no thinking you can always just watch the HP movies. Prachett is refreashing and makes you think. there are no movies and if you want your fix you have to sit down and read. Now I am not saying that HP is any better or worse.. I think that maybe there equal but how would you feel if you were an auther of romance and you got stuck presenting right after shakssphear every time you turned around. it dosnt mean your any less better but it does mean your work seems less worth someones time.. Look at mico angalo during his time he wasnt known but now we see him to be one of the best artist ever lived.
thisgirliknow
Aug. 1st, 2005 12:43 am (UTC)
Re: So totally true
During his time, Michael Angelo was DEFINITELY known. Kings from all around were petitioning to have him do their work.

Also, HP makes people think, if they look past the surface. Its definitely books that inspire deep thoughts.
(Anonymous)
Aug. 1st, 2005 01:47 am (UTC)
JKR is not taking away any of his fans or readers. If anything, she's brought more attention to the genre and attracted MORE people to his books and others of the ilk, probably bringing in readers who didn't like fantasy before Harry Potter. He is saying those things out of jealousy; simply put, he wants the same kind of money and attention she gets. He should be grateful.
subjectivity
Aug. 1st, 2005 05:48 am (UTC)
oops
that was me. Didn't realize I wasn't logged in when I wrote it.
( 10 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

botticelli
thisgirliknow
Much like pineapples, I am hardcore.

Latest Month

March 2019
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by yoksel