Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
I do think that Harry Potter is well written. It tells a good story and is entertaining. What more is necessary before something can be considered well written I really don't know.
|
A good editor. I think they fired hers after book 5, because they realized that anything she put on a page would sell. The seventh book, especially, could've been cut down by 1/3 without losing a bit of quality and would've been much improved by shortening the "camping in the woods" to a chapter or two, instead of a third of the book.
The story was good, and the later books built on the momentum of the first ones; if they'd stood alone, they wouldn't be nearly as popular because they weren't as well-written as the early ones.
Quote:
|
However, I would say that one can make a distinction between a well written book and a book that has literary merit, by which I mean that it shows an artistry with language, rather than just telling its story well.
|
I agree with your point, but I fear the term "artistry with language" is too prone to subjective debate. I think it is objectively identifiable, but in order to describe it, you'd have to start using academic terminology that would kill the average book discussion.