Jump to content
Canopus

Why is Harry Potter so popular?

Recommended Posts

This might sound like a daft question.

 

Why exactly is Harry Potter so popular?

 

I was discussing children's fiction at an AS meeting last year and a point was raised as to why some titles or authors are very popular whilst at the same time thousands of obscure and forgotten works of fiction also exist which. Are they unloved and unwanted by society or are other factors at play which makes the popular fiction popular and condemn everything else to obscurity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harry Potter was heavily promoted from the very beginning both in Britain and the USA, and the films added to its popularity. Most children's authors don't get anything this amount of publicity. This certainly helped enormously, but I think the mix of genres also had a great effect. It arrived at a time when the popularity of fantasy fiction in the Anglophone world was on the rise (including Sabrina the Teenage Witch, The Worst Witch, Narnia and a popular resurgence of Tolkien). There was, and still is, great interest in escapist fiction involving magic, fairies, witches and wizards, etc. - themes that have always interested me (to the extent of seriously studying European folklore, myths, legends and folk tales - as well as the psychology behind them). In spite of all the fantasy, the books involved many aspects of typical mundane lives of modern teenagers and older children. Young readers could easily identify with the key characters. The success of the Harry Potter books even popularised the idea of boarding schools. When at its most popular, I would often see adults reading the books (nearly always women). Whenever literature aimed at children and/or teenagers is found to appeal to an adult audience, it's a sign that there's something special about the 'recipe' used. Interestingly, many a Christian fundamentalist took it very seriously and it was widely and quite ridiculously condemned as 'satanic' - whatever that means..

 

I still read a great deal of children's fiction, more than I do adult fiction. I'm very fussy about both, but there are some brilliant children's authors out there - the less popular ones often proving to be the best, in my opinion. Of course, there is masses of children's fantasy fiction of a much higher literary quality, but due to lack of publicity, it's not anything like as successful as J K Rowling's output.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harry Potter was heavily promoted from the very beginning both in Britain and the USA, and the films added to its popularity. Most children's authors don't get anything this amount of publicity.

Why exactly was it so heavily promoted?

 

The obscure and forgotten works of fiction are not always new. Some are from the 19th and early 20th century.

 

This certainly helped enormously, but I think the mix of genres also had a great effect. It arrived at a time when the popularity of fantasy fiction in the Anglophone world was on the rise (including Sabrina the Teenage Witch, The Worst Witch, Narnia and a popular resurgence of Tolkien). There was, and still is, great interest in escapist fiction involving magic, fairies, witches and wizards, etc. - themes that have always interested me (to the extent of seriously studying European folklore, myths, legends and folk tales - as well as the psychology behind them).

One of the people at the meeting mentioned that fantasy was very popular amongst kids at the time Harry Potter was released whilst anything to do with space was unpopular. Space themed stories achieved their greatest popularity during the 1960s through to the mid 1980s but seemed to die when the Cold War ended.

 

In spite of all the fantasy, the books involved many aspects of typical mundane lives of modern teenagers and older children. Young readers could easily identify with the key characters.

Could that have been selling point over a pure fantasy work of fiction?

 

Whenever literature aimed at children and/or teenagers is found to appeal to an adult audience, it's a sign that there's something special about the 'recipe' used.

I was expecting different adults to have different tastes in children's fiction.

 

Interestingly, many a Christian fundamentalist took it very seriously and it was widely and quite ridiculously condemned as 'satanic' - whatever that means..

There has been quite a bit of criticism of Harry Potter from Muslim parents when it is being used in lessons or as take-home reading books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Plenty of well publicised films have flopped because the film makers did a mediocre job.

 

Harry Potter succeeded because of the care and attention to detail lavished on every part of the production. My personal favourite - Wizard's chess from the first film. Ron Weasley is often stereotyped as stupid and cowardly but he is neither. He takes control of the chess game with the skill of a grandmaster, and is quite prepared to die so that Harry can succeed. It is a shock to the audience because what was a fun film suddenly takes a very dark turn, and in doing so forms the emotional core of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like pretty much anything really, if the first film, book, game or whatever is initially a success, they end up churning out sequels and eventually, side stories and anything that rakes in the money. Harry Potter was a best selling book, so naturally, a film of it had to be green-lit eventually. Sometimes, sequels being made one after another can be a bad thing.

 

Take Resident Evil for example. For a good amount of years, it was hardly a horror series any longer despite the original title being a classic game in the 'survival horror' category. It was getting to the point where the zombies were getting removed in place of newer enemy designs and the franchise was becoming more like action, with only trace elements of horror remaining. They understood this was annoying a lot of the long time fans, though, and Capcom are working so hard to rejuvenate things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the Harry Potter series was good, but not the best. However, the last book was really awful. I get the impression JK Rowling just got sick of the series and wanted it over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to go on a tangent, but have any of you guys and gals out there heard of a Manga/Anime series called 'Negima!'

 

It's quite a bit like Harry Potter.

 

It's all about the adventures of 10yr old Negi Springfield, who as well as being a boy wizard (who looks a lot like the younger Harry) is a teacher of English (he's Welsh) at an all girls school in Japan.

 

At first it starts out as more or less your typical harem manga, where most of the ('very beautiful' as the manga describes them) girls in his class have a crush on him, however it then becomes a mix of romance, soap opera, action-adventure, SF and other genres.

 

In my view although clearly 'inspired' by Harry Potter, I actually think it is somewhat better.

 

Not that I am saying that Harry Potter is rubbish or anything..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is did J K Rowling just happen to hit all the right buttons and produce something that mass society was waiting for for a long time, or did she produce something that would otherwise have been reasonably popular amongst mass society but it hit all the right buttons of the media apparatchiks who then promoted it like there was no tomorrow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe one reason that it is so very popular that after the fourth book or so Rowling addressed an older age group and I thought it wasn't at all for children anymore. The ideas were clearly taken from the holocaust of the WWII and the persecution that took place. It made me cry so many times reading about the people who disappeared, hid in the forests, were found and killed, survived etc. I thought the theme was depressing albeit interesting and fascinating. Rowling seems to me rather a pessimist sort of person with a lot of underlying criticism in her books re society. Let's think of the Order if the Phoenix and the meddling of the ministry into Hogwarts, clearly a hint at OFSTED in schools. Or at least it can be interpreted this way. I couldn't stand the book, I thought Umbridge so nasty and cruel that it took me effort to get through this. I loved, on the other hand, the Goblet of Fire as I found it intriguingly creative and original and depicts the complexity of relationships very well.

 

I think it is escapism, yes, however, there was a so realistic chunk about it that a lot of people could relate to it very much.

Films are mostly more popular because it's easier to watch than read for many people, the music is a masterpiece, the effects excellent. Putting it all together - and of course being at the right place at the right time - and you have the result: an enormously rich woman who, hopefully, does many good deeds with her money as well as lead a good and decent life.

:) :) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story's got several layers, some of which JKR herself didn't realize, it seems. My favourite "helper" here is http://www.redhen-publications.com/(there's a sub-section about the "Potterverse").

Harry seems to be written so he appeals also to girls so there's many more (potential) readers than if it were a "boys-only" story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It always bothered me that a woman took males as heroes though. She should have put girls in a more central role, in my opinion. That has always been a point of criticism. And to be honest, he is not really appealing as a boy/man in a traditional sense. I thought he was often very aggressive and unbalanced. In the books, anyway. The films have a more positive view on him, I find. If the layers are subconscious, it's a little sad and disappointing. But probably very typical for a lot of people who live a life without realising how manipulated they are by society. By the way, I don't understand above website at all, what's the use and aim of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Harry Potter successfully combines many proven aspects of children's literature, as seen in work by Enid Blyton, CS Lewis, and old-style comics and annuals. The 'fun' boarding school were kids get up to adventures away from their family/parents, the 'cheer for your team' thing with the school houses, the scary magic and mystery stuff, the snobby kid who deserves to be taken down a peg or two, and the down-to-earth underdog hero. The language is quite old fashioned, too, not unlike Enid Blyton or Beatrix Potter, giving it an olde worlde feel. That said, I find it all very unoriginal, and just not as magical or well-written as the older works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it likely that Harry Potter will be popular in 50 years time or will it have faded into obscurity? Do you think there will be another J K Rowling in the future or was she a one off person?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the reason why Harry Potter is so popular is because it wasn't like Power Rangers!

 

Ie an Americanized TV show with lots of no consequence violence, American voices (in the films) characters dressed in spandex hitting and kicking other characters dressed in spandex and so on...

 

That fact that it came from the pen of one person rather than a team of writers, also seemed to help give it an identity, something which I can remember a number of children's books having back in my childhood.

 

I think it also appealed on more than one level as well.

 

Ie for kids you got all the adventures and magic, for adults you got all that plus, satire, good characterization and a story which remained them of the tale of their childhoods.

 

Just my two cents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be the exception here as I never have liked Harry Potter I have never thought much of the story and didn't think there was anything to keep you interested throughout the film.

Because I didnt like the first film I have never bothered to watch any of the others but equally I have not read any of the books either. I may read them as sometimes you can have a brilliant book but the magic is lost when it's made into a film. If I get around to reading it will post again about the book on its own merit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you're not an exception, LL, for HP isn't my type of reading matter, and not my type of film. They do nothing for me. Like you, I've only seen one film - all very technologically clever, but little more. I only like novels and films that evoke deep feelings within me, and make me think or expand my mind in some way. I find so much mass-produced modern literature bland, shallow, disturbing or sensational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...