By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - J.K. Rowling might WRITE Harry Potter 8 and 9!!! (OMGZ!!!)

Boutros on 03 October 2010
oldschoolfool said:
Boutros said:
scottie said:
dtewi said:
scottie said:

I has a sad.

 

There was a time shortly after the release of the 7th, that J.K.Rowling had stated that she intended to write a new, unrelated series under a false name. That way, her books would have flopped completely, and she would have been exposed as a mediocre kids writer.

 

Now, she will continue to write HP books, which will sell regardless of quality

Errr.... what?

Harry Potter are teenage novels, not kids, the first book was an unknown book too, and it didn't sell because she was "mediocre and unknown," but because it was actually a good book, and I get the feeling you don't like Harry Potter.

 

Indeed I don't like Harry Potter.

 

I'm willing to accept that the 4th, 5th and 7th books were actually pretty good, but can you honestly look me in the webcam port on your computer and tell me you think it is well written?

 

IMO - the first 3 are terrible

The 4th and 5th are much better written, which I suspect but can't confirm is the result of her getting a good editor. However, the world is still populated by caricatures*, instead of characters

 

The 6th she goes off on some completely irrelevant ramble about the Deathly Hallows, which she then promptly forgets for the 7th book

 

The 7th book was alright

 

* About the characters - they are all completely 2d stereotypes. Draco Malfoy is meant to be so generic that anyone who has ever been bullied by anyone can relate to Harry when Draco picks on him. The good guys are saints and the bad guys are all insane and want to kill everything ever. Come on, you can do better.

 

The only characters I think are well written are some of those of Harry's parents generation - Snape in particular, and that's because by the time she got round to developing their characters she had improved as a writer - I still wouldn't say she's anything above average.

 

As for the target audience, it was aimed at people the same age as harry. So 11 (I think) for the first book and 17 for the last - I spose that's mostly teens, but I usually refers to kids books as 9-14 and teen as 15-19. I'm obviously not comparing it to the Mr men series

The Harry Potter books are totally well-written enough. The best books I have ever read.


you must not read alot of books then. lol

That's the thing. I've read many books. Harry Potter still comes on top.



Around the Network
sapphi_snake on 03 October 2010
Boutros said:

That's the thing. I've read many books. Harry Potter still comes on top.

By chance would those many books be from the Gossip Girl or Tiwlight series? 'Cause then I could understand your position.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Boutros on 03 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:
Boutros said:

That's the thing. I've read many books. Harry Potter still comes on top.

By chance would those many books be from the Gossip Girl or Tiwlight series? 'Cause then I could understand your position.

No lol

Though I'd like to read Twilight.



dtewi on 03 October 2010
scottie said:
dtewi said:
scottie said:

I has a sad.

 

There was a time shortly after the release of the 7th, that J.K.Rowling had stated that she intended to write a new, unrelated series under a false name. That way, her books would have flopped completely, and she would have been exposed as a mediocre kids writer.

 

Now, she will continue to write HP books, which will sell regardless of quality

Errr.... what?

Harry Potter are teenage novels, not kids, the first book was an unknown book too, and it didn't sell because she was "mediocre and unknown," but because it was actually a good book, and I get the feeling you don't like Harry Potter.

 

Indeed I don't like Harry Potter.

 

I'm willing to accept that the 4th, 5th and 7th books were actually pretty good, but can you honestly look me in the webcam port on your computer and tell me you think it is well written?

 

IMO - the first 3 are terrible

The 4th and 5th are much better written, which I suspect but can't confirm is the result of her getting a good editor. However, the world is still populated by caricatures*, instead of characters

 

The 6th she goes off on some completely irrelevant ramble about the Deathly Hallows, which she then promptly forgets for the 7th book

 

The 7th book was alright

 

* About the characters - they are all completely 2d stereotypes. Draco Malfoy is meant to be so generic that anyone who has ever been bullied by anyone can relate to Harry when Draco picks on him. The good guys are saints and the bad guys are all insane and want to kill everything ever. Come on, you can do better.

 

The only characters I think are well written are some of those of Harry's parents generation - Snape in particular, and that's because by the time she got round to developing their characters she had improved as a writer - I still wouldn't say she's anything above average.

 

As for the target audience, it was aimed at people the same age as harry. So 11 (I think) for the first book and 17 for the last - I spose that's mostly teens, but I usually refers to kids books as 9-14 and teen as 15-19. I'm obviously not comparing it to the Mr men series


Excuse me, but you're not even getting the basic plot correct, the 6th book involving the Deathly Hallows?

Have you even read the series?



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you

sapphi_snake on 03 October 2010
Boutros said:
sapphi_snake said:
Boutros said:

That's the thing. I've read many books. Harry Potter still comes on top.

By chance would those many books be from the Gossip Girl or Tiwlight series? 'Cause then I could understand your position.

No lol

Though I'd like to read Twilight.

Oh my... are you a silly little tween girl? Did you fill your profile wrong?



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Around the Network
gergroy on 03 October 2010
dtewi said:
scottie said:
dtewi said:
scottie said:

I has a sad.

 

There was a time shortly after the release of the 7th, that J.K.Rowling had stated that she intended to write a new, unrelated series under a false name. That way, her books would have flopped completely, and she would have been exposed as a mediocre kids writer.

 

Now, she will continue to write HP books, which will sell regardless of quality

Errr.... what?

Harry Potter are teenage novels, not kids, the first book was an unknown book too, and it didn't sell because she was "mediocre and unknown," but because it was actually a good book, and I get the feeling you don't like Harry Potter.

 

Indeed I don't like Harry Potter.

 

I'm willing to accept that the 4th, 5th and 7th books were actually pretty good, but can you honestly look me in the webcam port on your computer and tell me you think it is well written?

 

IMO - the first 3 are terrible

The 4th and 5th are much better written, which I suspect but can't confirm is the result of her getting a good editor. However, the world is still populated by caricatures*, instead of characters

 

The 6th she goes off on some completely irrelevant ramble about the Deathly Hallows, which she then promptly forgets for the 7th book

 

The 7th book was alright

 

* About the characters - they are all completely 2d stereotypes. Draco Malfoy is meant to be so generic that anyone who has ever been bullied by anyone can relate to Harry when Draco picks on him. The good guys are saints and the bad guys are all insane and want to kill everything ever. Come on, you can do better.

 

The only characters I think are well written are some of those of Harry's parents generation - Snape in particular, and that's because by the time she got round to developing their characters she had improved as a writer - I still wouldn't say she's anything above average.

 

As for the target audience, it was aimed at people the same age as harry. So 11 (I think) for the first book and 17 for the last - I spose that's mostly teens, but I usually refers to kids books as 9-14 and teen as 15-19. I'm obviously not comparing it to the Mr men series


Excuse me, but you're not even getting the basic plot correct, the 6th book involving the Deathly Hallows?

Have you even read the series?

haha, I know, seeing as the 7th books title is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows... of course it has nothing to do with them.  Also, seeing how the hallows weren't even mentioned until the 7th book, his complaint makes perfect sense. :)



Boutros on 03 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:
Boutros said:
sapphi_snake said:
Boutros said:

That's the thing. I've read many books. Harry Potter still comes on top.

By chance would those many books be from the Gossip Girl or Tiwlight series? 'Cause then I could understand your position.

No lol

Though I'd like to read Twilight.

Oh my... are you a silly little tween girl? Did you fill your profile wrong?

I don't think Twilight is for girls only. Or else you'd have to acknowledge that most of Shakespeare stuff is for girls as well.



insomniac17 on 03 October 2010
Boutros said:
sapphi_snake said:
Boutros said:
sapphi_snake said:
Boutros said:

That's the thing. I've read many books. Harry Potter still comes on top.

By chance would those many books be from the Gossip Girl or Tiwlight series? 'Cause then I could understand your position.

No lol

Though I'd like to read Twilight.

Oh my... are you a silly little tween girl? Did you fill your profile wrong?

I don't think Twilight is for girls only. Or else you'd have to acknowledge that most of Shakespeare stuff is for girls as well.

Regardless of who Twilight is for, I don't think that they are good books in the slightest. The basic concept is interesting, but Meyer is an absolutely awful writer. I hated all of the Twilight books. 

As for another Harry Potter book, I would love another book from the same setting, but I'm hesitant to say I want another book about Harry and the gang. Despite how much I enjoyed the books, I do feel like their story is done. I'll read it if it comes, though. And most likely enjoy it.



Latest News/Discussion for Star Wars: Rebels and Star Wars: The Clone Wars!


plasticman13 on 03 October 2010

Harry Potter: ODST

Harry Potter Kart

Harry Potter Wars

Harry Potter: The Prequel

Harry Potter: Summer of 5th Year

Harry Potter 1/2: Ron Special



PSN: plasticman13

GT: TheGypsyHunter

gergroy on 03 October 2010
Soriku said:
gergroy said:

haha, I know, seeing as the 7th books title is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows... of course it has nothing to do with them.  Also, seeing how the hallows weren't even mentioned until the 7th book, his complaint makes perfect sense. :)


LOL.

Iif I'd noticed that part of scottie's post sooner I'd have responded. He's probably confusing the Deathly Hallows with the Horcruxes, but still how do you forget the 7th book's name that easily...

even if he meant horcruxes though it is kind of silly as they are a huge part of both the 6th and 7th books.