Why do you like Harry Potter?

[Roc]

For eons this question will be debated: What makes Harry Potter so famous? Is it the idea, the storytelling, or perhaps the intriguing characters? I know I love the feel of reading the Potter series, the freedom and the majesty the children have, infinite possibilities. They can tamper with magic at the flick of a wand and make wondrous things occur, and that is fascinating to read about.

Most of all I love the ideas of every novel. Rowling has not bored me yet; she always brings something fresh with every new novel (I hope the new one is just as good as the Potter books).

Why do you like Potter?

 

[Steerpike]

The ideas were done by others prior to Rowling, though she put a great many of them together and into an engaging series of stories. For me, the characters carried the series.

 

[Sheilawisz]

The Harry Potter story is brilliant, its world is fascinating and the characters are wonderful, but the true reason behind the series' unbelievable success is simply J.K. Rowling's talent as a storyteller. She takes the readers away from the real world and plunges them deep into her own universe, which is the job that we all as Fantasy writers should seek to accomplish =)

 

[David]

Harry Potter was the first series that I actually became engaged in. Reading the books actually created the perfect transition into reading adult fiction, and I would actually classify the last couple of books as adult fiction anyway! But the books are easy to read, easy to fathom, and characters that I really liked. I think that's the core reason I liked it- I liked the characters, I liked the world!

 

[Zero Angel]

I wish I could tell you, because I have plenty of negatives to say about the series.

At the end of the day though, I still find myself glad it exists.

 

[Finchbearer]

The other day I remembered my love of reading The Worst Witch by Jill Murphy, and had the realisation that this must have somewhat inspired JK Rowling with her Harry Potter series.

In The Worst Witch we meet Mildred Hubble who attends Miss Cackles Academy for Witches, who ends up in a kind of trio of friends, Ethel Hallow and Maud Moonshine…much like Harry, Ron and Hermione. There are so many other similarities. Mildred is born to two non magic parents and discovers her hidden talents along the way.

It’s a shame it never got the production team or money pooled into it to make it more of a franchise like the Wizarding World.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Harry Potter was a unicorn. A once in a generation thing, that managed to somehow catch the public imagination by being the right story at the right time. Just like The Da Vinci Code or 50 Shades of Grey were. You can study them in detail and point at all the things they did right, but that will leave you with an inconclusive and unsatisfying explanation.

I think the main magic of Harry Potter was the fact that it was a series where the first 3-4 parts were accessible to all ages, and that at the same time the books grew with their audience. This meant that each book could build on the success of those before it by selling to existing readers and new readers, leading to an exponential growth.

This isn't common among childrens books at all. Most childrens books series target a specific age bracket. They're for 9-12 or 12-14 or whatever. The first HP book is 9-12, the second is probably 10-13, the third is 11-14 and so on. In a time when releasing just 1 book per year was the norm, this made this incredibly powerful. Just consider, by the fourth book, the target age range was effectively 9-14, which is very rare for children's books. And where most audiences would have grown out of a series in four years time, the HP readers grew with the books.

Yes, there's the author's voice and style and the world and the characters and all that. But plenty of authors have that. Few have the above.

 

[LittleOwlbear]

I loved it back then and still have nostalgic feelings for the movies (not the books tho).
The movies were really well-made and gave Hogwarts and certain spells and magic a very fantastical feel to them.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

I don't. A nice, short answer. At 10 to 12 I might have liked it. By 16, I would've thought it was stupid. I get the appeal for kids, but that's as far as I can go. It's better than 50 Shades and Twilight! I'll give Potter that much credit, heh heh.

 

[Malik]

I have never read it, nor seen the films. I've been meaning to get around to it, but I've never had the time.

 

[Finchbearer]

They came out when I was ten - so they were age appropriate for me to read at the time. Would I read them now? No. I think the films were very good also for the time, but even the first few films are now showing their age.

 

[pmmg]

I did not really care for HP myself, and my reasons are numerous.

I don't have a strong opinion on Mrs Rowling's actual writing ability. I am sure my editor brain would find stuff to pick on.

I will say, I did admire the sense of imagination displayed in this work, from pictures that magically moved, to jelly beans that tasted like puke, and a 1000 little nick knack magic accoutrements that made the world interesting no matter what was going on. I also admire Mrs. Rowling's ability to spit it all out, and on a steady schedule. And her personal story of rags to riches was a tale by itself as well.

I think, however, we are already running into a generation that is inclined to say Harry Potter who? Cant be bothered to get off my cell phone enough to read it or watch the movies.

 

[Nighty_Knight]

They were fun and creative stories. I was entertained and enjoyed reading them and watching the movies.