|
|
|
|
|
| SFReader Forums > SFReader > Introduce Yourself > JRuland | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Christopher Heath
Neophyte
      
Date Joined Dec 2004
Total Posts : 95
| Posted 9/5/2005 5:01 AM (GMT -5) |   | I really don't see the problem with adults reading books that seem to be intended for children;
There is a problem for me personally, and here's why I have less respect for adults that seem satisfied with juvenile forms of entertainment. Let's say I have these two friends. One is into Sin City, Royal Tenanbaums, and Brotherhood of the Wolf. The other friend is into Power Rangers, Harry Potter, and Pippi Longstocking. I'll have more respect for the opinion of the first friend---take his recommendations on whether movies I haven't seen are good or bad, etc. Adults that pump money into these industries cause a glut of juvenile material crowding the markets. Maybe that's what most adults like, the average I.Q. is 100 after all. Most adults probably can't keep up with the wordy prose of Lovecraft, for example. It's nice that Lovecraft has a cult following, but I think his work far outshines a writer like Stephen King (another brash statement, I guess, since King sales crazy amount of books). Book sales never impress me (Robert Jordan, another example). I think the books that sell best are ones that the publishers decide (for whatever reason) to put their marketing money behind and give a push.
"I often wonder if modern fantasy authors would have more freedom if Tolkien had never had a book published, and whether modern fantasy readers would be more receptive to other types of fantasy."
Hard to say. I think a lot of the 500+ page epic fantasy novel conundrum has to do with those books being more profitable for the publishing companies; a matter of economics. Tolkiens epic length books weren't instantly popular, so it wasn't a matter of the publishers seeing the demand and responding. His books built up a following over the years because they were quality stories. Now, I think, the publishing industry is pushing these huge novels on the public, with little regard to quality and they're marketed well enough that they make a profit, nevermind how good they are. That's why I think Tolkien shouldn't suffer the brunt of the malice for this development in the publishing industry. I could be wrong, I have very limited knowledge in this arena, but that's been my impression. Some others on this board might have more valuable opinions and better insights. I'd like to learn more about it, if anyone has any info. | | Back to Top | | |
 |
JRuland
Stablehand
Date Joined Mar 2005
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 9/7/2005 4:09 PM (GMT -5) | | "The other friend is into Power Rangers, Harry Potter, and Pippi Longstocking."
To me, these don't fit into the same category. Just because the Harry Potter series features 3 children for the main characters doesn't mean it's necessarily "for children." The Narnia Chronicles is still my 2nd favorite book series and I firmly believe it falls into the category of "fun for all ages." I know a lot of adults who are reading the Narnia books for the first time and loving them. Just because we all grow up doesn't mean the fun and games have to stop completely.
"Adults that pump money into these industries cause a glut of juvenile material crowding the markets."
Hmmm good point. Still, in a free market economy the entire economy benefits if everyone does what's best for himself. If Harry Potter spurs a massive growth in the number of children's book being published, one of two things will happen: either the fiction market will grow because non-readers are willing to start reading children's books; or when the publishers lose millions on all these children's books that bomb, the market will automatically correct itself as publishers scramble to find books that people actually want to read. Therefore I still say that while I might find children's books or trashy throw-away books low on my list of interests, if people enjoy reading them then they should buy them. If the fiction industry is going to remain vital, it must remain an industry that supplies what the customer demands just like any other.
"I often wonder if modern fantasy authors would have more freedom if Tolkien had never had a book published, and whether modern fantasy readers would be more receptive to other types of fantasy."
'Now, I think, the publishing industry is pushing these huge novels on the public, with little regard to quality and they're marketed well enough that they make a profit, nevermind how good they are.'
That's not what I meant, but that's interesting too. What did actually happen to those short novels that were all over the country a few decades ago? And I pretty much agree with you on this. It seems as though the publishing industry is not nearly as dynamic as the other mediums of entertainment. My guess is that it's because publishers have too much pride and don't supply the right product.
What I really meant by my Tolkien question was whether Tolkien type-cast all of fantasy by his books. When most non-fantasy readers think of fantasy, they probably think of something more or less a clone of Tolkien's universe--e.g. elves, dragons, wizards, dwarves, etc. This is the kind of fantasy that sold truckloads of books for years after LotR was published, and still sells very well today (see Dragonlance). It has very much had an effect on the entire stock of fantasy books published year after year, or at least it seems that way to me. Correct me if I'm wrong. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Christopher Heath
Neophyte
Date Joined Dec 2004
Total Posts : 95
| Posted 9/7/2005 7:30 PM (GMT -5) | | "The other friend is into Power Rangers, Harry Potter, and Pippi Longstocking."
"To me, these don't fit into the same category. Just because the Harry Potter series features 3 children for the main characters doesn't mean it's necessarily "for children." The Narnia Chronicles is still my 2nd favorite book series and I firmly believe it falls into the category of "fun for all ages." I know a lot of adults who are reading the Narnia books for the first time and loving them. Just because we all grow up doesn't mean the fun and games have to stop completely."
* * *
My kids and nephews are constantly playing the Harry Potter movies, so I'm well acquainted with them. As far as my tastes go, they are for children. There is a juvenile aspect to them. Compare it to Lord of the Rings. While LotR has moments of levity, and doesn't stray into foul language and nudity, you can tell it was made for an adult audience as easily as you can tell Harry Potter was made for children. Sure, Harry Potter might have some cool visuals and some fun riddles or whatever that an adult could appreciate, but the target audience is children. Why so many adults are attracted to it, I can't quite figure out.
On the Tolkien question, I think he put his stamp on the genre and it's influenced other writers, certainly. I don't know if he was the first to have the standard cast that you mentioned, but it certainly has been evolving over the years with writers including many other races as characters and such.
"Still, in a free market economy..."
The thing about a free market economy is sometimes demand is driven by marketing, so I think my point is still valid. Books are time consuming and to a lot of busy people, they aren't that accessible in terms of sampling the content...so the reader will go for whatever is popular (King over Lovecraft, Potter over Leiber) etc. I guess what you're saying is that you don't see a problem with that. I do. Great works are being overshadowed by lesser works. That frustrates me. Then we go back to the "quality is in the eye of the beholder" discussion. You can't quantify art, so I'd never be able to successfully argue the King/Lovecraft point (though as I said before, I'd trust the opinion of someone who like Lovecraft over King before I'd trust someone who didn't think that), however, I know Harry Potter has children for its target audience, and the fact that adults are spending their time and money on Harry Potter (assuming they're not buying it for their children), is a bit ridiculous in my view, and other, more worthwhile fantasy books (again, just my opinion and why I'm frustrated at the industry) are being left behind. Also, there is an opportunity cost for other great authors who have submitted excellent works but are being overlooked because publishing houses are looking for the next "Rowling" rather than the next "Moorcock". Don't even get me started on the music industry... | | Back to Top | | |
|
JRuland
Stablehand
Date Joined Mar 2005
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 9/9/2005 2:08 PM (GMT -5) | | I think I see what's frustrating you Chris, and now I realize it's been frustrating me too. People read Harry Potter because everyone else is reading it, and since everyone is reading it publishers look for more of the same stuff. This is always going to be true for popular books/movies/music, but I'd rather see people reading books like Angels and Demons myself (which was quite a popular book that has been overshadowed by other recent bestsellers.)
I still think Harry Potter may have done the publishing industry a favor by revealing a way to reach non-readers, but only time will tell. After the final book is released and the hype finally dies, we will begin to see. | | Back to Top | | |
| 29 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Thursday, December 04, 2008 9:02 PM (GMT -5)
There are a total of 85,238 posts in 6,975 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 23 new threads and 174 reply posts. View Active Threads
| | Who's Online | This forum has 1315 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, billygibson.
16 Guest(s), 1 Registered Member(s) are currently online. Details
Jim Stratton |
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP2
dotNetBB © 2000-2008
(c) SFReader |
|
|
|