NEWS: Academics Talk Potter: Pratchett Complains

CULTURE: Academics Talk Potter: Pratchett Complains

There's few who would suggest that Harry Potter is only for children: but this weekend has seen one event that the under 18's are excluded from: the fan club Accio has held the first Harry Potter academic conference in the UK.

Meanwhile, author Terry Pratchett has thrown his toys out of the pram in a letter to the Sunday Times regarding the rise of J K Rowling, sparked by an interview with her in Time Magazine. where she stated that she was not a huge fan of fantasy and was trying to "subvert" the genre.

In his letter to The Sunday Times, Pratchett responds with sarcasm:

While you can see his point in relation to the article, some may point to a small amount of bitterness on his behalf: after all, he himself has almost been "subverted" now as the UK's leading fantasy writer by Rowling. The mainstream media will only pick up on fantasy and science fiction if it is suited to a wide audience.

I can kind of see her point. When I think of a great novel, I think of it on its own terms. But the genre books are something else entirely. For example, if I think of a "fantasy novel", I think of the formulaic bullcrap manufactured Thomas Kincaid-style by people like Piers Anthony, Anne McCaffrey, et al. Similarly with "science fiction", I think of the dozens of anonymous "Star Wars" and "Star Trek" novels, Harry Turtledove, and crap like that.

Sturgeon's Law: 90% of anything is crap.

I'm always going to be cynical about the inside workings of J K Rowling's mind, considering how quickly and easily she has become a billionnairess. Rather than subverting the genre, it seems more likely that she is manipulating it's audience, and although on one hand it is great that the Potter novels have managed to get so many more people reading, will the majority ever read another book? and creatively, could Rowling ever justifiably write another novel aside from HP (not that she has to, financially).

I think Pratchett's response is a fair one, for I feel that in general, much better authors are being ignored in favour of a money-churning HP machine (how quickly were the movie/merchandise rights sold?). To be taken at all seriously by other authors, and the few cynics like myself, she has to prove that she can do something different, I would certainly be interested to see her do something significant for society with the power she has - a recent poll ranked her as one of the most powerful women in the world, above the Queen!

Right.. I see what you mean. So I guess I sympathize with both of them. I can see why a respectable writer wouldn't want to be associated with disreputable genre books, and I can see why a respectable writer would like to see a genre perceived as disreputable made more respectable. It reminds me of Pratchett's friend -- and excellent writer himself -- Neil Gaiman proudly calling his illustrated work "comics" when so many others with literary pretensions want people to call them "graphic novels".

It's kind of like no good band on Earth will ever allow anyone to call them "emo", even when they clearly are in that tradition.

[Edited on Jul 31, 2005 by Keith]

It's hard to remember now that Harry Potter has become a huge franchise and financial institution, but she really did write the first one on napkins in a one bedroom apartment, and it took off on word of mouth among kids.

What the hell is wrong with Turtledove?
The Great War/American Empire/Settling Accounts series is great.

That's Theodore Sturgeon, the SF writer.

Half the point of SF is that it lets you ask questions no other genre does.

Edit for manual italic suckism.

[Edited on Jul 31, 2005 3:58PM]

I had the Drudge Report on while doing some E-mailing, and needless to say, ol' Drudge accused the Harry Potter books of corrupting the nation's youth. He assumed the kids reading the books would go out and "drink unicorn's blood" and "fly away on their broomsticks," and perform all manners of demonic witchery. I hope those kids hunting unicorns are really patient.

In any event, this is probably what Rowling is really trying to avoid: catching the wrath of the 'moral majority' who have demonized everything from Dungeons and Dragons to Grand Theft Auto. (We nerds catch it in the shorts every time the powers-that-be decide to hate on a hobby.) You should've heard Drudge belittling adults that read Harry Potter books... shit, it IS 2005, is it not?

Yeah, she's flat-out wrong about a lot of that. I like how Harry Potter mixes the classic fantasy novel with the mundane, the mundane really being the important stuff. And it's not that she's wrong, per se, that is what her books do. But I would suggest that if she thinks that's what fantasy is, she's reading the wrong fantasy novels. Because while Potter has its own spin on everything, I would never suggest it as being anything new to the genre in general.

I don't really have anything to add to this discussion... I just really, really enjoy Terry Pratchett's books.

I'd love to go to a conference like that. My friends and I were exploring the history of certain names in the books the other day. I love that so many of them relate to mythology and history and tie into the characters' personalities. (Sirius being the Dog Star, for example).

Pratchett (one of my absolute favorite authors) has a very good point. I don't think he sounds bitter at all.

[Edited on Jul 31, 2005 by Sorcha]

To me it's like the interminable is-SG-a-porn-site? debates. Yes it is, a soft-core one. It also subverts conventional porn. Good for it. Let's stop worrying and move along, eh?

subversive my pale geeky ass. Clive Barker took the genre to places it had never been. all JK Rowling did is cash in on Fantasy Lite.

that said, the movies aren't bad - though i wouldn't invest the time into reading the books when i could be rereading any one of Guy Gavriel Kay's.

my only hope is that Harry Potter is a gateway drug.

Me too. If I was an author, I'd be delighted to share the same shelf space as Terry Pratchett. He's fucking brilliant. Rowling ought to be proud of her genre.

New to the genre? It is the fantasy plot.
Normal dude suddenly finds out he can do magic.
Quickly learns that not only can he do magic, but he is the most bad ass magician in ages.
AND he has to fight the biggest badass dark wizard. That is every fantasy novel ever. Except Harry Potter is in school.

And Pratchett saves us all by creating Rincewind, the WORST wizard ever. And he was in a wizard's school. And this was many years before Rowling.

Don't even get me started on the Sorcerer University computer games..

Is there any genre that doesn't suck? Sci-fi and Fantasy are both up to their ears in crap, but so is every other genre. Mystery is mostly unreadable crap, Political thrillers are page after page of the same damned story Tom Clancy has been telling for thirty years, Romance is Romance, and all the non-fiction is drek and rot.

Sci-Fi and Fantasy just seem to get called out on it more often.

A lot of this is reminiscent of Stephen King's acceptance speech for the National Book Award. His basic thrust was that writing 'genre' fiction does not mean ghettoized fiction, and that more mainstream literary circles are traditionally the ones that reinforce the division. A choice bit:

That's what I said. It's a twist on it, because the school thing is more the thing that keeps you interested than that overall generic plot. All of the fantasy shit is just window dressing.

I'm just wondering if anyone has ever heard JK Rowling recommend any other good authors for fans of the Harry Potter books. She seems to spend an awful lot of time talking about how she's trying to change the genre for someone who has just barely entered it. I think the Harry Potter books are fairly decent reads but I was mostly excited to see kids actually reading. Now why can't she get them to turn their minds to something new. There are people who have read the books dozens of times each but don't even touch other books. I just wish she would use the position she is in to encourage people to read more in general not just read more Harry Potter.

i would be very upset to learn that JK Rowling thought of herself as a serious writer. I love her books because I generally had such low expectations.

Part of the reason people deny affiliation with genres like fantasy and sci-fi is that they dont get much recognition by the 'literati'. Just as how lord of the rings is still only dubiously respected by the literature community, so does it work for others of the genre. Its just people trying to disassociate with genres that dont get official recognition outside their own bounds.

Also Terry Pratchett is awesome, and his point is dead on I think.