I'm starting to think I'm the only person ITT who was a massive Potterhead from ages 10-13 (also a bookworm in general from ages 3-present).
We're on the same page! I actually made a lot of my life-long best friends because of
Harry Potter: I was super shy and quiet, and they started talking to me because they saw me reading the books. It's because of them that I went to fan meet-ups and came out of my shell. I try not to nerd out in this thread because of my personal story with it, but I adore it and have a huge soft spot for it.
It happened because she's a good writer who created an incredibly successful formula. Authors who write books for children are not lesser writers, they just follow different conventions.
Agreed. I'm sorry that my response, in an attempt to be snarky, implied otherwise. I meant to aim it at adult fans who don't understand what's in front of their faces (e. g. a common complaint is "why wasn't Sirius Black given Veritaserum before being sent to Azkaban?" when that's explained in
Goblet of Fire), but it's not what I wrote. I agree that Rowling is a good writer: her books are incredibly fun for literature nerds precisely because of it.
I'm stopping myself from nerding out right now.
A big problem in the Potter fandom is precisely the fact that they don't read much, and therefore aren't aware of the traditions Rowling was working with, be it genre conventions, character archetypes, British literature, history or whatever else. As you say:
Rowling was the only contemporary British children's author who came close to being as charming and entertaining as the old greats.
There's also a self-centeredness that prevents those sorts of fans from understanding the characters or their dynamics, since they see their favourite characters as themselves instead of as tools in a narrative (e. g. people who hate Lily, Harry's mother, because of how she acted in "Snape's Worst Memory").
Some adult HP fans don't read anything but HP, which might lead one to assume HP has overly simplistic writing, but it's not necessarily that so much as an unwillingness on the HP adult's part to develop new interests that don't invoke feelings of childhood comfort and nostalgia.
I agree with your conclusion. There's an unwilingness to be challenged that prevents complex reading or understanding, and it's a bigger problem than
Harry Potter. Another common example I see a lot is when it comes to Japanese literature: a lot of genuinely complex works get flattened into "cosy reads" simply because these people refuse to actually engage with the work —they just read them "for the vibes".
Rowling being a certified "bad person" just amplifies this sort of people. Now, there's a moral reason to not engage with what they're reading, lest they catch the TERF cooties. As you can imagine, most of them were more than happy to take the lazy way out and stop any pretense of reading all together. They enjoy her work and her characters, they love that such a popular property comes with a big, active community, and they love that they can brush off and insult anyone who points out that they're dumb as bricks.
