In a new and lengthy piece, author Stephen King has written a column for Entertainment Weekly, reflecting on Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, and in particular what J.K. Rowling has brought to children and reading. This article, which does contain spoilers for the final Harry Potter novel, first starts with a discussion of the spoilers and the early reviews which caused such a fury, with Mr. King noting:
The reviewers themselves were often great — Ms. Kakutani ain’t exactly chopped liver — but the very popularity of the books has often undone even the best intentions of the best critical writers. In their hurry to churn out column inches, and thus remain members of good standing in the Church of What’s Happening Now, very few of the Potter reviewers have said anything worth remembering.
He then goes on to focus on how he feels part of the secret of the success of the novels should be attributed to both the growth and growing up of the characters, and the development of Jo as a writer herself.
Rowling has been far more successful, critically as well as financially, because the Potter books grew as they went along. That, I think, is their great secret (and not so secret at that; to understand the point visually, buy a ticket to Order of the Phoenix and check out former cutie Ron Weasley towering over Harry and Hermione). R.L. Stine’s kids are kids forever, and the kids who enjoyed their adventures grew out of them, as inevitably as they outgrew their childhood Nikes. Jo Rowling’s kids grew up…and the audience grew up with them.
While some of the blogs and the mainstream media have mentioned that Rowling’s ambition kept pace with the skyrocketing popularity of her books, they have largely overlooked the fact that her talent also grew. Talent is never static, it’s always growing or dying, and the short form on Rowling is this: She was far better than R.L. Stine (an adequate but flavorless writer) when she started, but by the time she penned the final line of Deathly Hallows (’’All was well.’‘), she had become one of the finer stylists in her native country — not as good as Ian McEwan or Ruth Rendell (at least not yet), but easily the peer of Beryl Bainbridge or Martin Amis.
This very good column then concludes with Stephen King giving his thoughts on why writers like J.K. Rowling are important to children and reading.
I began by quoting Shakespeare; I’ll close with the Who: The kids are alright. Just how long they stay that way sort of depends on writers like J.K. Rowling, who know how to tell a good story (important) and do it without talking down (more important) or resorting to a lot of high-flown gibberish (vital). Because if the field is left to a bunch of intellectual Muggles who believe the traditional novel is dead, they’ll kill the damn thing.
It’s good make-believe I’m talking about. Known in more formal circles as the Ministry of Magic. J.K. Rowling has set the standard: It’s a high one, and God bless her for it.
This issue of Entertainment Weekly will be on newsstands starting today.
I loved the pictures that went with the review too. I may go back to King. He scared me silly when I was young. Never picked up another of his books. Loved just reading the review.
SK says “Like Rowling, he was a Scholastic author, and I have no doubt that Stine’s success was one of the reasons Scholastic took a chance on a young and unknown British writer in the first place”
Mrs. Lovegood says “The passage I’ve quoted above seems to give Stine the credit for Rowling being discovered in the first place, as if the wonderful story she’d written wouldn’t eventually have gained such a following. I find this hard to swallow and even harder to agree with. I admit to never having read any of Stine’s books, but I just can’t believe that Stine paved the way for Harry Potter in the way that King suggests.”
I think King gives Scholastic the credit for finding and promoting another writer like Stine, that would get kids reading. And rightly so. JKR’s manuscript had already been rejected by 5 (I think) publishers before her U.K. publisher accepted it. There are many, many very good works that are rejected in any given year. That’s just the intangible cost of the business. And in that world, Stine set the bar for a popular series (also called chapter books) that got young readers into reading. And JKR has badly bent that bar!
Mrs. Lovegood says: “Then after this wonderfully flattering analysis, he says that Rowling has improved in her writing ability but she still isn’t as good as a couple of British writers I’ve never heard of, and then he goes on later in the review to spend two whole paragraphs criticizing elements of her writing.”
Yes, JKR is sometime clunky with language, with descriptions, and character conversations. The camping bits in 7 do drag the plot, but there are many gems of language and image that really sparkle. The difference between 1 and 7 is massive—-so much so that I can’t read 1 and 2 any more. JKR’s a writer, so this critique is no news to her. And SK has had similar criticism leveled at him (he can’t writing ending for nuts!). Again, it’s part of the business that they’re in.
Mrs. Lovegood says: “When I said the King might be jealous, I meant that, while he’s written lots of books and had best sellers, he’s never had a book as popular as the Harry Potter books, and those were Jo’s first published works. That has to be kind of hard to take, when he’s worked so hard to get to his status as well-known author.”
You don’t remember the re-release of SK’s “The Stand: The Complete and Uncut Edition” in 1990? The version that’s now the standard? That caused quite a buzz then. Now it’s no big deal if a writer or director does a revision of their first work. And the sales of Carrie (1974) in paperback sold 1 million in its first year; in 1974, this was really big! I remember them all.
Like, JKR, he’s been writing since childhood, and has 30 years of best-sellers under his belt-—and a lot more criticism than she’s endured. Notwithstanding the 20-year age difference between them, I consider them peers, and I think he does too. I think he admires her immensely and understands, like few people on the planet can, exactly what she has wrought-—not only a series of books, but movies, t.v. shows, video games and a impact to world culture. No jealousy there.
I don’t like authors commenting on their competitors, as to me it’s just like dropping the name of another book in their novel for the prestige. To even bring R L Stine into comment as well, is just poor. His books got a lot of people reading that weren’t interested in so call ‘literary masterpieces’ and as an adult I’ve frequently been put down for reading childrens books. The fact that they have motivated me to buy them and lots of other fictional books is the wonderful thing! Such books influence our culture for decades or more.
Posted by a little bit loony on August 11, 2007, 01:49 AM
report to moderator
“I’m glad this is the strongest language in the books, though I still question the use of swear words at all. What’s good about how they’re used in the HP books is that they are true to real life.”
Surely they are not really true to adolescent life. Well not to adolescent life as I remember or as I hear it when my teenagers doors are shut and they think I am out of range!
Dear, dear, Mrs. Lovegood is certainly getting a dressing-down, and I hate to add to it (particularly since she seems to have adopted the persona of dear sweet Luna’s dead mum), but her lengthy diatribe against swearing is SO off the mark. The very power of swearing is in its judicious use. Hermione, to my recollection, never resorts to it; she has her extensive academic knowledge to express herself in other terms. Ron swears the most, and one would argue that he is probably the least intellectual of the three (notwithstanding his mastery of wizard’s chess). Additionally, he has his naughty older brothers as models. And certainly no one would begrudge Harry an expletive now and again - his life has been grueling. Note how swearing appears more and more often in subsequent books - for good or bad, this reflects reality as the children mature.
I shall be very disappointed if Mrs. Lovegood doesn’t step up and say ‘BITCH’ aloud when Mrs. Weasley confronts Bellatrix. It’s a powerful word, made much more powerful by Mrs. Weasley’s disinclination to swear (even in the face of overwhelming provocation!) and by the import of the moment. My own 10-year-old daughter, while not as sheltered as Mrs. Lovegood’s 9-year-old son, was shocked and yet found the tone absolutely appropriate (and even a little funny, coming from Mrs. Weasley). I think Mr. King hit the nail on the head when he stated that it was a perfect adult moment—what mother wouldn’t react in this way?
The idea of King and Rowling being competitors, by the way, is ludicrous. They don’t write in the same genre. Would the Rolling Stones consider Yo-Yo Ma a competitor? Even two writers of the same genre probably don’t consider themselves competitors. Goodness, it’s not as though a reader chooses only one book or one author to spend time with. If anything, exposure to one writer would open to the door to others.
I have read a few of Stephen King’s works and I like him as not only a storyteller, but I have great respect for his massive inventory. There was a period in the 80’s and 90’s where a new Stephen King book came out every six months and many, like “IT” and “The Stand” were a bit longer than Order of the Phoenix. He’s really only slowed down since some idiot ran him down with a truck. But anyone who has had that kind of life in literature knows what he’s talking about and rather than dismissing Jo as a “childrens author” who appeals to adults too, he points out that her writing spans the generations UNLIKE R.L. Stine who is rarely ready by anyone over the age of eighteen.
I am thrilled that Stephen King has taken the point on letting the world know that the works of JK Rowling are not just this generation’s answer to Star Trek geeks. When a fandom is based in literature rather than TV the quality and level of intelligence of that population is extrordinary. If you doubt this, read some fan fiction or listen to PotterCast. There is some really deep thinking going on. Melissa and Sue are passionate and eloquent. Yeah, even you, John Noe…Wit beyond measure is man’s greatest treasure…and your insight into the the world of Harry Potter is dead on, even if it’s masked with that sharp wit. So along with Stephen King, I am proud to count myself as a fan of the Harry Potter series and JKR.
Never heard of S.King before 2005, started liking him in 2006(after read his thoughts on Harry Potter and Jo), And after reading this article I am starting to get fond of him.
Although would never read his work(too gruesome for me) but this article was very entertaining being a review of DH. I will definitely say Jo is the most powerful minister of ‘Ministry of Magic’.
I am so sorry you missed the thrust of SK’s praise for JKR.
The beauty of JKR’s work, as stated by SK, is that the characters in the story grow up as the story goes along. This dosent happen offstage as they do in IT. Nor do they stay eternally young as R.L Stine insists on penning his own. No, Harry, Ron, Hermione, and all the rest grow up, live and yes even die as the pages turn. That is a core fact of the books, and honestly its one of the reasons the books caught my attention to begin with. The only other authors I know of who use this literary device in their children’s books are Madeline L’Engle and C.S. Lewis both avowed masters of the genre.
As far as his being jealous of her… ummm Excuse me how is that supposed to work? An established writer of adult horror/thriller fiction is going to be jealous of an established writer of fantasy/fiction. despite the fact that they write for seperate genres and demographics? Why because she has sold a lot of books and had movies and games based on her work? Last I checked SK was in the game because he loves writing, not to put points on some mythical ‘me against the world’ scorecard. If anything SK would be thrilled that JKR is opening up so many people to the idea of reading for pleasure, it means more people walking into the bookstore who might just pick up one of his MANY titles, that tend to run the gamut from macabre, through fantastical, right up to classic suspense.
SK is, and will remain one of, if not the most powerful writers of his generation. He will always be one of the most proliffic writers in the history of writing. JKR is easily one of the strongest writers of this generation. I am fortunate enough to be able to read them both in a time when I can still ask either of them a question… with a reasonable expectation of getting an answer and a smile for my trouble. What amazing times we live in.
P.S. Anyone who has read the Dark Tower books, should go back through SK’s catalogue and try to find how many books reference his (suprisingly also) 7 volume masterwork.
King is a GENIUS. He put into very eloquent words everything worth saying about the way Harry has been reviewed over the years (they always seem rushed, and missing the flavour of the books, don’t they?) He gave totally accurate constructive criticism of book 7 (which like the rest of the series, has flaws but is overall brilliant)
The point he made about the success of the series being that the children are allowed to age is one that I was dimly aware of in the back of my mind, but which I now realize is going to be stupendously important to Harry’s legacy.
He writes beautifully about Harry’s place in literature, Jo’s sense of humour…a fantastic, amazing article that puts the rest of us muggles in our place. I guess that’s why he’s the bestselling author! He really should do more criticism and reviewing, he’s brilliant at it. In fact, he should WRITE THE FOREWORD for Jo’s Harry encyclopaedia. Can someone start an online petition? I can think of no one better.
Posted by Hagridlurveshappyhour on August 11, 2007, 10:11 AM
report to moderator
Hmm, I think this was generally a very good article, but I was kind of annoyed by his extensive use of (somewhat mixed) metaphors. And although I know it wasn’t meant in a derogatory manner, something about repeatedly comparing R.L. Stine to John the Baptist (even in a metaphorical sense) rubs me the wrong way.
I know this is kind of picky, but I also found myself annoyed by King’s apparent obliviousness to the fact that “A Cauldron Full of Hot, Strong Love” appeared in the books prior to Deathly Hallows. Given that he seems to be promoting himself as just as much of a fan as the rest of us. Maybe I’m misinterpreting the context he used.
All in all, I definitely appreciate his sentiments about reviews, JK Rowling’s appeal, and the fact that reading will probably endure as a children’s pastime. However, I found the article to be too much of a mishmash of pop-culture references, and a wee bit too patronizing for my taste.
I usually enjoy any review that actually reviews the work as opposed to rehashing plot. I’ve loved Stephen King for about 30 years now…and J.K. Rowling ever since Harry was born. It’s pretty simple; I love a good book.
The articles OK but the praise is so over the top I mean how can he say that JK Rowling is a better stylist than M AMIS wtf? JKR’s style is purely functional.
The right-hand window was covered with a gigantic poster, purple like those of the Ministry, but emblazoned with flashing yellow letters: [i]WHY ARE YOU WORRYING ABOUT YOU-KNOW-WHO? YOU SHOULD BE WORRYING ABOUT U-NO-POO -- THE CONSTIPATION SENSATION THAT'
I loved the pictures that went with the review too. I may go back to King. He scared me silly when I was young. Never picked up another of his books. Loved just reading the review.