/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13224747]

Why does this book trigger /lit/eralretards so much? My fucking advanced fiction writing professor told us he refuses to read it, which makes me really curious as to what reason he has for hating a book he has never read.

[Anonymous No.13224749]

It's gay

[Anonymous No.13224750]

>>13224747
It's a kids book, why is this even a discussion ? I read and loved Harry Potter as a kid. Going back it's really mediocre and I'm not sure why I ever esteemed it above things like Percy Jackson and the Olympians.

[Anonymous No.13224810]

Because it's for kids. You wouldn't force your teacher to read the Hungry Caterpillar

[Anonymous No.13224885]

>>13224747
>My fucking advanced fiction writing professor
1. Literati are generally a bunch of circle-jerking snobs, who classify literature in genres - with some genres being beneath them. If your professor downright refuses to read a fucking book, then fantasy is apparently too "low-brow" for your professor. Which means your professor is shit. While shakespeares of yore challenged the broad audience, the literati are a small cult group with its own conventions, meant to keep masses at a distance.
2. Harry Potter per se is objectively shit, the epitomy of brainless pop culture chewing gum with clumsy plot, imbecilic characters, conventionally "deep" ideas (yes, "racism bad!", we know, thanks. Fucking truism already now) and atrociously questionable morality (shit like "Death is just another adventure").

[Anonymous No.13224887]

>>13224750
It's very clearly head and shoulders above the typical YA schlock, stop insulting something you enjoy to posture for your internet friends.
It's arguably the greatest effort ever in children's literature, with the enchanting world, the moving and realistic relationships, sound morals, and solid, lucid prose.

[Anonymous No.13224900]

>>13224885
1. Brandon Sanderson and the other unwashed neckbeards you read will never be taken seriously and are the product of capitalist malaise and the soulless short attention span of the age. It isn't some conspiracy, you and the "writers" you read are childish and frivolous and everyone who reads seriously agrees because they're smarter than you. You namedropped Shakespeare like you've read him and understood why he's a great writer. You haven't and you don't.
2. If this wasn't already apparent, your taste is shit and you should kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.13224910]

>>13224885
>hating books for political reasons

You are no better than them.

[Anonymous No.13224911]

>>13224887
Aren't there like 20 fucking lines a page? C'mon, a big part of its popularity is the narcissism of reading a "big" book as a kid.

[Anonymous No.13224919]

>>13224887
>It's arguably the greatest effort ever in children's literature
Nope, that would be Narnia

[Anonymous No.13224926]

>>13224919
Narnia is up there, I'd rank HP over it though. The characters and world are superior.

[Anonymous No.13224927]

>>13224887
>It's arguably the greatest effort ever in children's literature
"no!"

[Anonymous No.13224945]

>used to have a harry potter backpack and lunchbox for school when i was a little kid
>used to love harry potter
>used to think britain was magical like harry potter
>mfw growing up and realising how bad britain and superficial jk rowling are

[Anonymous No.13224949]

>>13224910
I'm not hating if for "political" reasons. I'm saying that the "racism" theme was fresh in, say, 19th or 20th century. Mark Twain, Harriet Beecher Stowe, etc - a shitload of people had already expressed their opinion, and did it way better.
The Harry Potter themes nowadays are a well-troden sycophantic mainstream, the literary merit of this book is virtually non-existant. No challenge, no daring, no revelation. Nothing that makes good literature a good literature.

[Anonymous No.13224951]

>>13224945
>used to like Harry Potter's world
>now it's full of transexuals and homosexual relationships I didn't know about

Why

[Anonymous No.13224959]

>>13224926
Haha no, the characters of Harry Potter are ass

[Anonymous No.13224961]

>>13224747

It's not bad but you can kind of tell that Rowling hadn't quite solidified the main plot the series was going to follow yet

[Anonymous No.13224962]

>>13224951

[Anonymous No.13224969]

>>13224959
haha, your iq is lower than your notch count

[Anonymous No.13224974]

It's imperative to have the full Harry Potter series on your shelf when you have a girl coming over

[Anonymous No.13224976]

>>13224969
How are the Harry Potters characters well written? There one-dimensional caricatures who would be mock in any other work

[Anonymous No.13224981]

>>13224976
>There one-dimensional caricatures who would be mock in any other work
You have surpassed my expectations.

[Anonymous No.13224984]

>>13224981
I guess I win this internet argument

[Anonymous No.13224987]

>>13224962
I honestly can't tell if this is extremely racist or not.

[Anonymous No.13224988]

>>13224969
>notch count
If people are touching you inappropriately you should tell a teacher or trusted adult immediately.

[Anonymous No.13224993]

>>13224885

[Anonymous No.13224994]

>>13224969
You’re flamboyantly underage. Go to bed, kiddo.

[Anonymous No.13225004]

>>13224919
>Narnia
Solid guess but it was actually The Wind in the Willows.

[Anonymous No.13225005]

>>13224994
>>13224988
stop being this mad and samefagging up the thread, you were embarassing enough to begin with

[Anonymous No.13225007]

>>13224962
She's always had "lovingly antisemitic" relations with the Jews, look at Gringots

[Anonymous No.13225009]

>>13225005
Sure faggot, I’m the only person who thinks you’re underage for defending a literal children’s book this hard on a Chinese weaving forum. If anything’s embarrassing, it’s you.

[Anonymous No.13225010]

>>13225005
Cope harder tastelet

[Anonymous No.13225021]

>>13225009
>>13225010
threads on /lit/ don't move this fast bro, and there are not people this mad on your behalf, very embarrassing to see

[Anonymous No.13225030]

>>13225007
or mudbloods...