HP and lurve and time-travel, or Saturday at Worldcon

[lady_schrapnell]

First panel was one with a title which probably earned it its very large hall: 'Harry Potter has put children's fantasy back fifty years'. The moderator was Graham Sleight, who did a good job, and the panelists seemed to arrange themselves conveniently on the pro the motion side (Jane Yolen and Sharyn November) and con side (Julie Bertagna and Elizabeth Wein). (I have my schedule in my lap, in case anyone's wondering about my great powers of recall!). Jane Yolen was great on this - funny, obviously not in the least bit bent out of shape about JKR's phenomenal success, but unprepared to go along with the fervour just because. And annoyed by the ADVERBS. ;) Much allowance was made for the sheer fun of being part of something, and the fact that HP had 'raised the profile of children's books', and 'got kids reading' (a truism about which I and my two daughters seem to be unique in being skeptical), and S. November, rather memorably said pretty much that everybody's got to read 'crap'. It was also fun hearing J. Yolen talk about being on a list-serve which is inundated with fanatic adults talking about nothing but HP, and knowing precisely what she meant, because I read that list. One story, which was said to be gossip, and is offered as such (though I know the numbers are right), was that when one of the HPs didn't come out when originally expected, Scholastic, which had budgeted on the huge boost of sales from it, had to fire 400 people and back out of planned books already being arranged with authors. Granted, Scholastic's business policies may have been to blame, but it does rather underscore some kind of problem with the idea that HP has been such a huge boost for other children's writers, I think.

Inevitably, after the usual 'my kids (biological or in classroom) devour HP' etc, lines, there was someone who pretty much lit into JY and SN, along the lines of how dare they say it was bad writing if so many people, adults and children, had thought it wasn't. This I actually find quite frightening. Nobody is a snob, pseud or phony for not liking HP. Nor is any author necessarily bitter and jealous for not liking HP. And if proof were needed of the acceptability of this lack of HP enthusiasm, it would surely come in their praise for other children's fantasists - like Diana Wynne Jones, and wish that the popularity were a little more wide-spread among writers like her.

J. Bertagna did make the point about the way Bloomsbury very successfully used the story of the poor single mother in the - er, actually, that's a quite dear cafe in Edinburgh, but let's forget that aspect of it all!

Comments

[generalblossom.livejournal.com]

The HP panel sounds interesting, though I got to say a lot of gripes with it seem to have nothing to do with the series itself. And in the end the series sucess was pretty much out of the blue to the publishers, take a look at the first printings of the first book, compare it with stuff like Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell. Also rather amazing the scope of the series, planned since the start, 7 books darker and darker and so complex in plotting. 7 books! The closest YA series to it in scope might be Geraldine Harris or Lloyd Alexander. In terms of plotting also adore the Attolia books, but if only we would get 7 of those. In some paralell universes it´s an unknown cult favorite. Not sure what bad writing is in any case, there are so many aspects to it, and I got to say I prefer HP to some much more critically aclaimed authors ;)

[lady-schrapnell.livejournal.com]

Don't forget, I'm only remembering very sketchily! It certainly did come out of the blue - Julie B. and Sharyn N. were both saying (from different perspectives) that a huge number of publishers had turned it down. It was kind of exploitive on the publishers part to push the starving single mum bit in such an exaggerated way, though. And some of the gripes don't have to do with the series, exactly, but the way people are attacked if they do anything other than say HP is the greatest, most original writing ever and single-handedly invented AND saved fantasy writing for children. Including your own Terry Pratchett, who was accused of being jealous when he made the mildest (and funny) comment about JKR's statement that she didn't know she was writing fantasy! Terry Pratchett jealous of JKR? Maybe he just thought it a bit daft for her to say that... It's not JKR's fault that there's quite the level of hype and adulation either - personally, I'd hate to find I'd traded places with her only marginally less than with anyone in the British Royal Family. Shudder.

[generalblossom.livejournal.com]

And some of the gripes don't have to do with the series, exactly, but the way people are attacked if they do anything other than say HP is the greatest, most original writing ever and single-handedly invented AND saved fantasy writing for children.

Perhaps, but have seen a lot of the other side, perhaps even before. I started reading it, lemme guess, book 4 had not came out yet, 2001 and a lot of the press was very sneering about it all.

Including your own Terry Pratchett, who was accused of being jealous when he made the mildest

Not quite mine, but I would buy him a beer :) I know what you mean, I just think media or publishers behaviour ends up not having much to do with the novels themselves, or so I should hope! But these books really seem to bring out all sorts of extreme behaviour, press, and fans, fandomwank has been unbelievable since book 6 come out.

Totally agreed about in no way wanting to be in JKR´s place. Nevermind if the idea of single mom was used or whatever, at the end what she set out to write was not something at all likely to be commercial.