I'm not talking about the the society in Brave New World, in which case I'd agree with you 100%. I'm talking about the philosophical debate between the world Controller (or whatever you call it) and John near the end of the book. In that discussion, they explicitly discuss the merits of art (and science) and the merits of happiness and how the two are opposed. At the end of that discussion, the Controller refers to a few alphas who have been exiled to remote islands for their "radical" opinions, and say that they are actually better off there. He then explicitly says that society, as a whole, prefers comfort. Yes, that society might have been conditioned to prefer comfort, but then again, at some earlier point, society had to make a conscious choice to go in that direction in the first place. Regardless, I concede that choose was a bad word. Let me rephrase. The end discussion pits happiness against art. The result in the story is that most people live by happiness, and only a few recluses choose art.
Ah, fair enough then. I think the World Controller was called Mustaffa Mond, or something? It's been years since I read the book.
Harry Potter is intended for children, so excuse it if it isn't as intellectually stimulating as the "Death Gate" novel(s?). The beauty of Harry Potter is that it infuses the classic social drama of British boarding school life with magical wish fulfilment fantasies. It's creative and really appeals to people. As you mentioned, the plots are usually solved abruptly by Harry Potter being at the right place at the right time, so it's not entirely perfect.
Alright, so being one of the younger generation (23), my words may have little sway. However, it seems to me that alot of the issues brought up can be boiled down to the different levels and standards for education. I am definetally a great example of this, I am no where near as proficient at reading and writing as I would like to be. This being sad, I am trying to change that. Alot of this, and remember this is just my personal opinion, is a result of people believing they are owed something. That we are 'owed' and education. The strive for bettering ones self to survive is gone, why go through the heart ache when (as stated) you can live off of the state 'that should take care of me anyways.' I believe reading hand writing has followed this trend, those with that spark strive to make themselves better and create beautiful works of art. Unfortunetely, if it doesn't immediately entertain or make someone money, most of the time the interest is lost. =(
I don't agree with your first sentence, what you say counts as MUCH as anyone, whether you have degrees coming out of your ears, or not! Standards of education - not sure about that either, though we are ´conditioned´from birth which counts for life expectations more than education to my mind. You say you are 23, which means others here may have had three times as many years as you in reading experience. This also means you are fresh, you haven't been 'got at' by society, and probably you are untarnished with cynicism that a lot of us old ones have gathered. Whatever you have to say counts very much, if only to remind some of how we were. (This may sound patronising, it isn't meant to be!) Agree with you on the 'life owes me a living' mentality. Not too sure how this can change, unless we are all plunged into this 'disaster' that some are anticipating by are hoarding tins of beans. If only we could bring back imagination, instead of this instant gratification fix we've come accustomed too, maybe then we will see great novels being read, and of course written.
Bad literature sells for the same reason bullshit movies, role-play games or drugs sell. Most people are lazy simpletons who want cheap escapism, plain and simple.
I'd say they sell so well through a combination of luck in catching a zeitgeist, marketing, and presumably those books must be fun reads. I think it's important to be positive, and see the good that is all around. In television, yes there are a lot of silly reality shows at the moment but there is also some excellent drama, comedy and documentaries. There are brilliant, thoughtful films being released all the time, despite the power of the Hollywood blockbuster. And in literature too, people are writing - and publishing - wonderful works, and while it's a shame that those authors will probably never get the 7-figure royalty cheques of their more commercial peers they are out there. If any of our books are good enough (and by good I mean interesting and engaging, not just free from excessive adverbs and other such perils) I firmly believe that they will get published and read too. The whole 'aren't people crap these days' discussion pisses me off too much, so I'm not getting into that
What's wrong with that? In fact, I do think we should stop complaining about situations and circumstances we don't like and start blaming the people for being so plain dumb. Not only fairly trivial matters like this one, but pretty much everything bad in the world can be blamed on the people (save for natural disasters).
hmm seems i should have worded the thread better as most dont get what i meant by bad literature, i meant it as bad written literature and thought by giving examples it would be clear but seems it was'nt or most didnt bother to read... After all we are here to be (or are) writers and want to learn how to write better, yet what sells most is what sets bad examples to writers umm did you even read my post? please do before you accuse me of anything as i didnt say one nice word for "death gate series" but trashed it cause if an unknown writer wrote it probably would never have the chance to publish it, but shows how well known writers who have many fans can get away with it. Sorry if you are a fan of HP(i know a lot of people now probably hate me) but try and look at it as a writer, now if those plot holes were fixed and characters were consistent would it not be a better book? Would probably take longer time to write and edit though... I get that stuff is rushed when their is a deadline to reach, so is it the editors fault or the publisher or is the writer just that bad?
I'm not worried i know people dont like to hear their favorite book trashed just as much i dont like been told that the silmarillion is a boring book i agree its not easy to read though, but we are here to learn to be better writers so what better way to learn than see how published writers did it. The first book of Potter series was actually good but thats probably cause it took her 6 years to write it and edit it, its the rest of them that kept getting worse and sloppy writing
I worry about the same issue, as well. However, the tactic now used to blunt criticism doesn't solve the problem. Let me give you an analogy. I cannot think of a bigger waste of time than following the Kardashians. They have broken every societal more--now the mother is alleged to be dabbling in adultery--and don't seem to care as long as the money keeps flowing in. But if you say the obvious, they brand you a "hater." Well, duh, of course I hate it. That family has two minor teenage girls headed down the same path. If the family was "common folk" you can be assured that Social Services would be taking the kids. But by reflecting reasonable criticism in using this insipid modern principle, many people remain silent for fear of being ostracized by peer group pressure. But there's lots of drek I hate. Political correctness that blunts free speech. People who treat the Bill of Rights like a 'pick-and-choose' salad bar. Zombie stories. And our biggest new trend, claiming that the sausage machine of simplistic ramblings are really a new genre. Let me look into my crystal ball. I expect to be tossed out of this forum, probably before spring, due to demerit points. Like earning a few "insulting members" points for refusing to bend on a principle. That's also part of a "new normal." If you cannot win a debate with a well crafted rebuttal, you whine. However, it's a good example on how mediocrity worms it's way into our system. As a boy, if you were punished at school, you got punished a second time when you got home. Now parents call lawyers. Same with our stories. "Criticism" now means that all replies must lead with 'loved it to distraction.' Even the crap. I cannot wait to see what the new wave of thought-police invent.
I however have one question, and feel free to tear it to shreds and I know you will. Has anyone yet thought to look at the people the author is writing for? Harry Potter for example, was written not for adults but for kids and teens. Tale of two cites, meant for adults or higher educated. So I guess my real question is this, why should someone judge something that they read when it wasn't meant for them to read? It's like handing a devout baptist a book on Darwinism and expecting them to not only like it, but agree.
But of course, you're not one of those. Yes, people read and watch and do stupid things. Sometimes they read and watch stupid things because they've been bombarded with serious important things all day and just want their brain to relax for a while. Sometimes they read and watch those things because it's fun to poke fun at them. If a book is badly written technically, but still makes big sales, it's because the story, the characters, the setting - something in that book was good enough to overcome the typos and the awkward phrasing. Live with it. But this idea that because people like something you don't means those other people are stupid - that's the height of conceit. Get over yourselves.
I actually think most people are put off by literature not because it's actually hard, but because they think it will be hard, and so they don't bother. It's a real shame too. If there is one thing I could change about the world then that would be high up there.
Absolutely! The average reader wants a story and being a great story teller doesn't necessarily mean you are a great writer. My favorite writer Lee Child, who doesn't mind taking a few liberties ("It is completely and utterly divorced from real life,” he said about the 'show, don't tell rule), sold 32,000 of 'Worth Dying for' the first three days in UK alone. That's plenty of sales from someone that's not a great writer. Kazuo Ishiguro, on the other hand, is a great writer and I read all his books enjoying them immensely. When I tried to read another great writer, Doris Lessing, I found her to be above my level. I couldn't read her books and enjoy them nor appreciate her writing. I personally believe reading is a dying art, or at least mortally wounded. That's why I think we should encourage reading in almost all forms. For many years in my childhood I was sold on Marshall Groover, and as I got older I progressed to other authors. So bad writing, and I think we can all agree to place Marshall Groover in that category, does have it's place. An important place because some of those reading Marshall Groover will go on to read other things.
Yes I agree, and I also think one of the reasons people think it will be hard is discussions like this.
Agreed, many people think it is boring and difficult, which is not an attractive combination in a form of entertainment. I think a good English teacher at school can make a world of difference - we had some awful ones but for our GCSE years we had a brilliant, passionate teacher who got much of the class really into the books we were reading - and I went to a fairly rough north-east colliery school. Unfortunately even she couldn't make me enjoy Silas Marner, though I am tempted to give that one another go...
I was lucky in this respect. I had some good English teachers at school. But then again, I was in top sets and so they gave us more attention. They taught us poetry by making a game of it, getting us to interpret it ourselves, and it was a lot of fun. I am training to be a teacher now, and the differences in teaching approaches, between the abilities of different classes is actually quite amazing. Also, now they set aside about 10 minutes of each English class to 'concentrated reading' and you can tell who are the ones who actually care about learning in just those 10 minutes. It does go both ways - but yeah, a good English teacher is like a godsend. And I would give Silas Marner another go to be honest. Actually, I always seem to enjoy George Eliot much more the second time around for some reason.
That wasn't why HP is not a fulfilling story, it's because Harry failed to fulfill his role as the Chosen one and lacked Character Development, note I am a fan of the series but I'd betray it if I compliment it falsely. Anyway, why bad literature is sold so well is a puzzle to me as well. At least the HP series was amazingly creative compared to Twilight or the Mistborn series by Brandon Sanderson and many more that have terrible examples of literature. I suppose they sell well because the author has either self published/advertised or because these stories contain things that appeal to our grand audience whose standards are declining. I looked at Twilight out of curiosity and to be honest I was this close to throwing up. It's just bad and a shame but so many readers would stick their fingers up my nose for saying that, specially some girls. That could probably be because Mr. Edward is every girl's prince charming and that is something the writer used to advertise her terrible characters. Passivity of a main characters is no excuse for a good plot, give me a simple plot but good characters that make me like/dislike them like real people and I'll be content.
Yeah I was in the top set for everything except Science (and I got an A* anyway - still unjustifiably pleased about that! ). Looking back my school just seemed to have too many teachers who were kind of just waiting to retire - it didn't matter so much for me or my friends, but so many kids don't get the encouragement at home either so they were never going to do well. Slghtly on a tangent now but a friend of mine fosters, and her last foster child still had meet-ups with her mother. During exam time my friend had got the kid to revise, and when her mam found out she went ballistic and said she wasn't supposed to revise - she actually told her daughter that if it was difficult, stop before you get a headache. Children raised like that just don't seem to have a chance, it makes me so sad.
there really is some serious elitism here from people who I don't think really have a right to. How many of you have actually published material considered by Nobel Laureates to be worthy of a prize? What gives anyone the right to say what is bad or what is great? Comparing Harry Potter to a Big Mac? C'mon... McDonald's is handy, open most hours and is cheap. Bookstores give all their books the same exposure (apart possibly from the odd poster) When you write, do you write what you would like to read? Or do you write for a particular market? Children's writers: You couldn't possibly write for yourself, you must have the ears of children in your mind. It's obvious. 99 kids out of 100 would walk past the bookshop to get home and watch the movie on youtube instead. Shouldn't we be glad that kids are reading at all? Or that people in general are still reading at all? Do many, or at least high percentages of people even have time to read these days? Or is just the retired stuck up type who like to think they are ammateur Joyceans rocking in there chair with a pipe in their mouth or a ball of wool at their feet? Blame the bookshops on selling bad lit? They have a ton of stuff on their shelves - it's up to the buyer! So the reader skips war and peace and picks up 50 shades... Is that the fault of the publisher or the bookstore or the agent or the dumbed down writer? it's no one's business and no one has the right to say "thats crap - why would even consider contaminating your beautiful shelves with that shit?" While we are all here to improve ourselves and learn to be better writers , some people need to lose their jumped-up illusions that their material is wasted on such idiots, that kid's books (HP) should be taken off the shelves and replaced with 18th Century Classic Latvian Village Poetry or that people who buy it at all should be taken outback and shot. Published writers write for their audience. If they don't, their agent will tell them to. If their agent doesn't, the publisher will and if books don't sell - then the book store owner will be on his back too. They write and print and publish books they hope will sell in their millions, be translated into 90 languages and eventually bought up by Hollywood. Of course they do and we all have the right to like it or not, we don't have the right to slate someone for reading what "some" consider "below them" rant over...
As far as teaching the teenagers the classics, I actually think that many of them are just beyond their ability to truly comprehend, simply because they don't have the maturity or life experience to do so. I suspect everyone would be much better off if high schoolers were taught really good YA that they could really relate to, and that would get them more excited about reading overall, and they could enjoy some of the classic pieces of literature (that are really written for adults) when they're older and better equipped to understand and enjoy it.
