Quote:
Originally Posted by Luffy
YA books that have bad writing are not that difficult to detect. Sometimes the blurb is a giveaway point. Sometimes the cover is useful, e.g. a Rick Riordan book where the hero looks exactly like Kurt Cobain.
But Harry Potter makes for very good reading. You like mystery. Well the first 4 Potter books are mystery-based. The 5th shows us a lot of Dumbledore. The 6th I don't recommend because it's full of romance, and the last one is a mess. (I did give them all 5 stars, but that is neither here nor there.)
I don't want to play the role of a misbegotten missionary but people of every age reads Harry Potter. And when we are all dead and Potter is in public domain it will surpass Sherlock Holmes as the most-adapted-to-screen books.
|
But what is bad writing can be very subjective. What is bad writing to one person is often very enjoyable to another. I've enjoyed the heck out of some books that objectively aren't all that well written. And I've been bored to tears by many generally acclaimed books. So I've learned to disregard the whole bad writing/good writing debate. I might take notice when the overwhelming majority of readers say the book is practically trash, but otherwise I pretty much ignore the reviews and opinions of other people in regard to what is a good book.
As to Harry Potter, I could not get into it either. It's not that it's derivative or YA; I've no beef with either one. Mostly it was the characters. They were just too boring, particularly Harry. The worldbuilding wasn't much better, imho. I finished the first book, but never read the rest of the series and probably never will.
In short, tastes differ pretty wildly.