Do you think J.K. Rowling is a good writer?

I think she is a good writer but like any other person in this world, she is flawed.
I do not find her language innovative or especially poetic, which some people value highly in writers. However, I find her great at writing characters and I also find that her writing is smooth, which for me defines a good writer: you don't have to re-read the sentences to understand the meaning*

*Possibly some would say this is a basic expectation of writers, but haven't we all experienced this at one point or another?

 

A skilled and adequate writer.
A brilliant and masterful creator.
Not only did she establish a truly believable world with interesting characters, she crafted an equally and remarkably unbelievable world with bizarre characters, fused the two and presented it on a silver plate. You can see dents on the platter, made from the hammer that gave it shape, but that doesn't take away from the flavor of the dish itself, and that in itself is praiseworthy.

 

Me too!

I hate Order of the Phoenix with a passion, but not because of the writing. Half-Blood Prince is the best of the bunch.

 

Agreed wholeheartedly. Order of the Phoenix is incredibly well-written and the Harry vs the Ministry stuff is really interesting and well done, but dammit it's so hard to read. Umbridge makes my blood boil, Harry's attitude and the mistakes je makes can be super frustrating, Dumbledore's bad judgement calls. And of course the major death at the end...ugh. Makes me want to pull my hair out everytime I read that book which isn't often.

HPB on the other hand, is a joy to read despite how dark it is, I love everything about that book.

 

My own, personal view is that she is a good writer. I have read a few of the Harry Potter books, but I find that people tend to focus only on these books - as if they were her whole career. Now, I confess to not reading very much else that she has written outside of the world of Harry Potter - but this doesn't mean that you can't analyse her writing.

One of the major points I like to raise when it comes to replying to questions like this is that what, technically makes a good writer? Pretty much everyone has been brought up, both by parents and the classroom, to follow a particular set of rules when it comes to writing. I mean, we have all be taught to use full stops at the end of our sentences, to use bold only when it comes to the important sections of writing. Some writers do not follow this set of rules, and suggest a completely different perspective on this that the reader must adapt and challenge themselves to. This, in my opinion, makes a good writer - as it challenges the reader to understand the writer's point even if it's conveyed in a less-traditional sense.

To give you a bit of context over my next point, I am reading Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire at the moment. I have found, so far, that the book flows gracefully - and allows for description, dialogue and storyline without making it hard to read. I find that J.K Rowling's description is beautiful - and, if you watch the films - her description of (most) of the characters and castle is conveyed without fuss.

Overall, I find J.K Rowling an excellent author - and she tends to not break, but bend some of the rules of writing, but does so in a way that the reader can still understand what is happening and how it is being described.

 

She is a wonderful writer. Her characters and the way she formed the entire world of Harry Potter is genius. I have to admit that the only character in a book that I have cried about afterwards, when I was not even reading the book anymore, was Severus Snape. Masterful.

 

One of the reasons the series is so successful is because it's accessible to such a wide audience, though that's also the biggest thing that held the books back from being literary masterpieces. Like, say... Paradiso and Inferno, in a way. Though Inferno is hardly comparable to Harry Potter, Paradiso is more of a literary masterpiece than Inferno, while Inferno is much easier to read, and is therefore more popular. Different levels of literacy, different ballparks, but the comparisons are comparable.

A similar example is that of Conrad's work. While pieces like "Heart of Darkness" are considered modern literary milestones, there are many (including myself) who tend to avoid his stuff because it makes our heads spin. Instead, people tend to read from authors like Stephen King and Louis L'Amour because they're more relaxed and fun.

Sure, J.K. Rowling isn't the best author, but she is entertaining.

 

Meh, difference of opinion. I was very active in the HP fandom at the time HBP was released. I knew plenty of other fans who abhorred that book as well. To me, the book series reached its pinnacle during books 4-5.