HPLF WX Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Genre and Writing Styles of HP

Go down

Genre and Writing Styles of HP Empty Genre and Writing Styles of HP

Post  Elanor Sun Jun 05, 2011 1:37 am

Genre and Writing Styles of HP

This topic serves as an archive of a thread from the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum as hosted on World Crossing which ceased operation on April 15, 2011. Elanor

S.E. Jones - Jul 18, 2006 1:31 pm
Edited Oct 19, 2006 8:20 pm
I read an article today on TLC discussing some literature expert's view of JKR's writing. I really had to agree with most of what he said, but I think he's taking his opinion of the writing style she uses from the first two books rather than from the series as a whole. He mentions that the stories are of a "British Private Boy School" genre where "the stories tend to focus on rugby games (Quidditch games in Harry Potter) and pranks that take place in the dorms after the lights go out". That may very well be true of the first few books, but somewhere in PoA the direction definately shifted. So, exactly what genre did the books move into?

Also, do you think JKR is following a particular writing stlye, using particular plot devices, or employing particular character types? How do you see these elements being used by JKR?

EDIT: I moved the previous discussion about the article itself to the new folder discussing HP news articles.
Elanor
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France

Back to top Go down

Genre and Writing Styles of HP Empty Genre and Writing Styles of HP (Post 1 to 25)

Post  Elanor Sun Jun 05, 2011 1:37 am

Veritaserum - Jul 19, 2006 8:07 am (#1 of 25)
Go Jays!
Awesome, first post!

I think JKR is definitely using the "fantasy/quest" genre to some extent, what with her young hero trained by the old wizard, becoming the Chosen One, having to face the bad guy alone, etc. The Boarding School novel makes sense a little, too. I would agree with you, SE Jones, that the series may start this way, but it certainly evolves into something a lot more.

I think, though, that you can't really put these books into a specific category. As JKR said, she writes them for herself, so really, she can follow whatever rules she wants. They span many genres; think about it: they are obviously fantasy, but you've got your coming-of-age novel, mystery, spy thriller, adventure...you catch my drift?

- - - - - - - - - -
Katrina Nadja Romanoff - Jul 23, 2006 2:28 am (#2 of 25)

Hp books'genre is the one that make you want to read them at least ten times!

- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jul 23, 2006 2:40 pm (#3 of 25)

I'm not sure that's a genre, Katrina. HP is certainly a different genre from Jane Austen's books, and I've read all but Northanger Abbey at least ten times ... probably more. Perhaps Jo has created a new genre ... one that combines features of several other genres. Who knows?

Solitaire

- - - - - - - - - -
zelmia - Jul 30, 2006 2:34 pm (#4 of 25)

Oh! And that's a bad miss!
Well, I would agree that the author of that article has not read past about Chapter 3 of CS. Beyond that, there is very little to compare the Tom Brown's School Days, "English Boys' school" style of fiction with that of JKR's. Apart from the fact that both sagas take place in a boarding school.
Because of this, there will always be certain elements that are familiar - a fact that Mike Newell, by his own admission, capitalized on when making the film version of GF. And very successfully, if I may say so.

I think the HP saga is more closely related to the Hero Myth paradigm than any other. Which is why Dumbledore's death, while sad, was not the least bit surprising to me. In the Hero Myth, the mentor must be removed from the saga before the final chapter, signifying that he has taught the Hero all the Hero needs to fulfill his destiny. This does not have to mean that the Mentor dies. Abstinence can be employed in that the Mentor cannot or will not be able to assist the Hero any longer. Think of Merlin in the King Arthur legends.
Still, JKR is indeed very adroit at comedy and I would sooner compare that element of her style with Mark Twain, rather than to Dickens. There is a certain "Huck Finn" quality to Ron's sarcasm, for example - though of course Huck Finn never really complained much about his own rather tragic existence. But especially the way she writes Harry's observations of, particularly, the adult characters with a slight bit of editorializing. Very amusing.

- - - - - - - - - -
Vulture - Aug 24, 2006 4:01 pm (#5 of 25)

It's just my opinion, but I like it !!
I'm not much of an expert on Stephen King, but I do get the odd flavour of his kind of atmosphere in JKR's work _ mainly in "The Riddle House", Ch. 1 of book 4, and in the parts of Book 2 where Harry hears the Basilisk.

- - - - - - - - - -
journeymom - Aug 25, 2006 11:56 am (#6 of 25)

Vulture, good point. JKR has written some truly creepy passages.

- - - - - - - - - -
Vulture - Oct 1, 2006 5:28 am (#7 of 25)

It's just my opinion, but I like it !!
Is this thread supposed to stick to book genres, or is it OK if we find stuff in JKR's books that remind us of TV dramas, etc. ?

I ask because sometimes the HP books seem to be using themes and images familiar to anyone interested in World War 2, and that comes up on screen as well as on paper, in both hisory and fiction.

I don't suppose it's news to anyone that the Death Eaters' mentality brings the Nazis to mind _ and in both mentality and appearance, they're like the Ku Klux Klan. The Order Of The Phoenix has been compared, elsewhere on the Lexicon, to underground resistance movements in WW2 occupied Europe, and on other websites, I've seen Dumbledore compared to both John F. Kennedy and Churchill.

In the 1970s, the BBC made a fantastic series called "Secret Army", about the lives of an underground Belgian resistance group who helped shot-down Allied airmen escape from Europe during World War 2. I mention it because, for some reason, much of the inter-action between HP characters reminds me of it. I felt this particularly in "Order Of The Phoenix".

If you don't know the series I'm talking about, you can look at these websites:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Oh, and I nearly forgot: as JKR is roughly in my age group, she might very well have watched "Secret Army" while growing up as well !!

- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Oct 14, 2006 9:33 am (#8 of 25)

Can this thread be used to discuss literary devices?

Various types of devices come up periodically in discussions and I think we tend to have different assumptions about what those devices really are or how they're used.

Some examples are red herrings, Chekov's gun, and unreliable narrator.

For instance, I was thinking about red herrings today and how often we come up with various theories from clues that we perceive in the books. Often someone will say, "oh, that's probably a red herring." But it seems to me that a red herring has to be used by the author to intentionally deceive the reader. If the evidence that the forum poster found is so buried that you have to really read closely, and maybe several times, to find it, I would think it cannot be an intentional "red herring." The supposed evidence may not actually mean anything important, but if it's not evident for the average reader, it's not a "red herring" either.

Can we discuss this kind of thing on this thread? Are there other literary devices that JKR uses that interest people?

- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Oct 15, 2006 12:17 am (#9 of 25)

Let it snow!
Certainly, wynnleaf, that's actually one of the things I had in mind when I started it, so discuss a way.

- - - - - - - - - -
valuereflection - Oct 17, 2006 1:23 pm (#10 of 25)

Various types of devices come up periodically in discussions and I think we tend to have different assumptions about what those devices really are or how they're used. Some examples are red herrings, Chekov's gun, and unreliable narrator. (Wynnleaf, Post #Cool

I'd like to see someone post a good definition for each of these devices, along with a few examples of each from the HP canon, please. I tried to look them up online, but I couldn't find definitions which I completely understood (especially for the last two). I think it will lessen confusion for many readers, as well as myself. Thanks in advance.

- - - - - - - - - -
journeymom - Oct 17, 2006 1:58 pm (#11 of 25)

From wikipedia, Chekov's gun: "A Chekhov's Gun is a literary technique in which a fictional element (object, character, place, etc.) is introduced early and in which the author expects the reader to invest. That investment must 'pay off' later in the story even if the element disappears offstage for a long interval. Every detail, object and character must have significance to the conflict."

"One must not put a loaded rifle on the stage if no one is thinking of firing it." -Anton Chekhov

There are so many of these in the series. One example is Scabber's missing toe. It turned out to be Pettigrew's missing finger.

Unreliable narrator: I'm not sure this is a universal term. But I take it to refer to Harry himself. Snape supporters (I count myself as one) have speculated that some, not all, of the reader's negative impression about Snape is colored by Harry's emotional reaction to Snape, as the story is told through Harry's point of view for the most part. Example, in HBP when Harry answers that ghosts are see-through and inferi are not, Snape answers very sarcastically, "Oh, excellent Potter, ghosts are see-through. Wonderful to see that 6 years of magical education isn't being wasted." Or words to that effect. I know that was supposed to be mean, but I thought it was pretty funny. And Harry deserved it. He may have been technically right but he had to know that wasn't what Snape was asking.

- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Oct 18, 2006 7:27 am (#12 of 25)

Here's a piece from Wikipedia:

In literature and film, an unreliable narrator (a term coined by Wayne C. Booth in his 1961 book The Rhetoric of Fiction[1]) is a literary device in which the credibility of the narrator, either first-person or third-person, is seriously compromised. This unreliability can be due to psychological instability or other disability, a powerful bias, a lack of knowledge, or even a deliberate attempt to deceive the reader/audience. The nature of the narrator is sometimes immediately clear, though a more dramatic use of the device delays the revelation until near the story's end, resulting in a significant realignment of the point of view from which the reader/audience thought they had been experiencing the story. Sometimes the narrator's unreliability is only hinted at, either at the beginning or end of the story, resulting in ambiguity in the reader/audience's mind as to how the story should be interpreted.

One of the earliest known examples of unreliable narration is Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales. In the Merchant's Tale, for instance, the narrator, being unhappy in his marriage, applies a misogynistic slant to much of his tale.

Many novels are narrated by children, whose inexperience makes them inherently unreliable. In The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, for example, Huck's inexperience leads him to make overly charitable judgments about the characters in the novel; in contrast, Holden Caulfield, in The Catcher in the Rye, tends to assume the worst.

The last paragraph gives a good comparison to the HP books, since in HP the pov is from Harry.

HP is not in first person. But what we see in the narration is that it is done from Harry's viewpoint. We see what Harry sees, and we don't see what he doesn't. But further, we tend to get his "take" on everything. The reader is lead to believe whatever Harry believes, like the people he likes, dislike the people he dislikes, and attribute to characters whatever motivations Harry tends to give them. If Harry believes something is unfair, we tend to see it as unfair. If he believes something is necessary for him to do (like rescue someone), we tend to assume he's right. But the books are actually written that way, so that we'll take Harry's pov.

- - - - - - - - - -
valuereflection - Oct 18, 2006 1:25 pm (#13 of 25)

Thank you for helping me with definitions. Just to make certain I understand -- is there an unreliable narrator in the poem, "My Last Duchess," by Robert Browning? (Or is that poem an example of another literary idea?)

- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Oct 18, 2006 6:48 pm (#14 of 25)

Ha! Well, I suppose the Duke is unreliable. Of course, the reader can figure it out if you think about it (all smiles ceased, or something like that). On the one hand, the Duke isn't really covering up the truth, but he certainly is putting a different spin to it. Further, he describes the Duchess' attitude, actions, etc. as though she was doing something wrong (smiling at others was wrong to him), when of course a more objective view makes it clear that the Duchess was sweet and innocent and the Duke a regular Blue Beard.

- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Oct 19, 2006 8:19 pm (#15 of 25)

Let it snow!
Here's a question for those interested... is HP "children's literature"?

JKR has been quoted as saying she is writing in a very epic style and that she writes what what she, herself, would want to read. If you look at the HP books, you find the first two do somewhat read like many other children's stories, but then somewhere between book 3 and 5 it moves into juvenal literature, and I think HBP showed some signs of moving into adult literature (I don't mean that in a "non-forum-friendly sort of way) and I think Book 7 will follow suit. I think this has been very intentional as it allows us, Harry's shadow, to grow up along with him in these books, no matter what age we are when we start reading them. "Children's literature" isn't itself a genre so much as a confirmation of who the author is targeting as an audience. While JKR certainly knows her books are being read by children, I have to disagree that she is targetting them only as an audience. I know a lot of her books being published under the "children's literature" title comes from what her publisher thought would see, even going so far as to use her initials so they could more easily target boys versus girls (they didn't think a boy would want to buy a book written by a girl). I'm curious to hear what other members have to say on the matter.

- - - - - - - - - -
Nathan Zimmermann - Oct 19, 2006 9:06 pm (#16 of 25)

S.E., I agree that the labelling of series as childrens literature is a gross misrepresentation of the series. J.K. Rowling's works like those of Tolkien, Lewis, LeGuin, and White transcend age boundaries to the phiophical leanings of the author.

Additionally, I believe that publishers insistence that J.K. Rowling use only her initials on the dust jackets, endpages and title pages in order to target boys, is exceedingly shortsighted and demonstrates rhat the publishers like Epithmetheus are gufted only with hind sight or after thought.

I find that J.K. Rowling's works doe emcompass two quotes



Some books leave us free and some books make us free. Ralph Waldo Emerson


One's mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimensions. Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr.
- - - - - - - - - -
shadzar - Oct 20, 2006 1:17 am (#17 of 25)

Edited by Denise P. Oct 26, 2006 6:06 am
We can look at the banned books list and see some people don't think her books are for children. I think the labels are coming from groups which control the media outlets in the US, and similar in other countries.

The thought that all things should be appropriate for children, jsut because children might pick it up and read it, or change the TV channel and watch it. Parents should be more involved in explaining these things to their children than letting elected officials decide what is right for their children.

How many people want to ban the Holy Bible. It has been said to contain more inappropiate material to children than most other books. But they argue that the context in which it is written is the difference. the fact that something may or may not come into the hands of a child is the responsibility of the parents to ascertain its value and guide their childrens understanding of the material within.

I am not saying everything should be smut, but likewise everything shouldn't be Teletubbies either.

Books should be defined by their genre, and not converted to suit one age range over another. Advertising demographics has greater skewed peoples outlooks at what entertainment content today realy is. Look at all the reality shows like Big Brother, Survivor, American Idol, etc that survive solely based on viewers aged 18-35. Those things like HP that may sem to appeal only to yougner audiences of the past just might still enjoy them today as they have grown up to fit within that target demographic range of 18-35. Not everyone that age range sits around drinking beer and watching sports on TV as the ad companies and ratings boards would think.

the genres themselves:

sci-fi: advanced and futuristic technology...nope, tech doesn't work with magic.
fantasy: it goes without saying HP fits here without a description
romance: the key point in HP is not initame
drama: there is dramatic elements but not what you would see in a soap opera
horror: little to no blood and guts. AK is quiet subtle

Fantasy seems the best fit genre, with elements of a few others underlining the story, and that is how it should be scene. The ageism needs to stop! This prejudice is just ridiculous.

I think everything should not be classified as "children's" just because it is full of mature or adult content. Old board game ratings make more sense than changing something to fit an age range just put it on the product. Monopoly: for ages 8 and up. (don't want a 3 year old trying to eat the sports car or houses.)

Funny it doesn't place a cut-off age on Monopoly, and the same should be with books.

- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Oct 20, 2006 2:18 am (#18 of 25)

Let it snow!
You know, it's odd what people want to ban these days and why, as well as what is considered "chidren's literature". One of my favorite books as a kid was 'Dragon's Blood' by Jane Yolen. I read it all the time and never thought there was anything bad in the book. When I was older (my first year in college, I think) I took my little brother to the library and saw the book, so I checked it out again for old times' sake and wow, I couldn't believe the things I read in there, the sexual references and violence. I read one particular paragraph to my sister and she couldn't believe that was written in a "children's" book. As a kid I read over the passages and they had no meaning to me (because, honestly, what little kid really thinks that way) but as an adult with a wider understanding of the world the passages took on a whole new meaning.

Okay, rambling over, back to the "children's literature" topic....

- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Oct 20, 2006 9:48 am (#19 of 25)

JKR has been quoted as saying she is writing in a very epic style and that she writes what what she, herself, would want to read.

Has JKR specifically said that the HP books are not children's literature? The above statement is not the same. If you look at the books she mentions as favorites, many are children's literature, so writing what she would want to read does not mean it's not children's literature.

As regards what children's literature actually is... I'm not sure that we all agree on the definition. In general, I think what is really meant by the term is that the book is appropriate for children or young people. Additionally, being written about children strengthens the characterization that something is children's literature. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the book is written specifically for children or youth readers.

For instance, C.S.Lewis wrote the Narnia books in which the main characters were children, and the plotlines are very appealing to children. Further, there was little in the books that would be considered inappropriate for children. They are often listed among lists of children's literature. However, the books are widely read by adults and the overall themes are actually very adult.

I tend to see the HP books in a similar way.

I agree with JKR that even the first books had a lot of very serious content. It was just written about in such a way that it seemed a bit lighter. But I don't really consider the overall content of the books to have become more adult. What I think is that the emotions portrayed by the characters are darker and that makes the books seem darker. Plus, there is less page time spent on the "fun" things in the books.

I don't really expect to see any darker content in Book 7 than we've already seen. But I do expect to see more of it -- more dark content, but not to any greater degree. So I expect to see more deaths, but I don't necessarily think we're going to see the justification of good guys killing good guys.

- - - - - - - - - -
legolas returns - Oct 20, 2006 11:55 am (#20 of 25)

I thought that JKR said that she did not start out for her book to be a childrens book but it was a childrens publisher that accepted her book.

- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Oct 20, 2006 1:06 pm (#21 of 25)

Let it snow!
While I disagree with your last paragraph, I think the rest of your post very though provoking, wynnleaf. I especially think this line very important to the current line of dicussion "As regards what children's literature actually is... I'm not sure that we all agree on the definition." Maybe were most of us differ in our view of HP as "children's literature" is whether we see the books as being written in a "child appropriate" way versus written to children?

You gave the example of Lewis's Narnia series as being an example of something child-friendly with heavy themes that is considered "children's literature". There's also the example of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings series, which is generally not considered "children's literature" but which I would argue is still "child appropriate". The distinctions we make about how we define the term really colors our views of it and might help greatly with the discussion.

- - - - - - - - - -
Soul Search - Oct 20, 2006 1:44 pm (#22 of 25)

Looks like we have to define "child" as well.

And, by the way, some of the classic "childrens" tales are quite gruesome. Hansel and Gretel, Little Red riding Hood, etc. And nursery rhymes like "ring around a rosey." That's about small pox.

I have never understood why those tales are still around.

- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Oct 20, 2006 1:57 pm (#23 of 25)

Let it snow!
That's an excellent point, Soul Search. I think my view of what I consider "children's literature" is actually colored by what I was forced to read in school as a child. They didn't really go much for classics like Aesop's fables and the Brothers Grimm and such (which I prefer, heck I got Peter Pan a couple Christmases ago because my family knows I love such books); they were more into "modern classics" which rather belittled those who read them. Maybe others who have a problem with things being titled "children's literature" have a similar background? I had mentioned on another thread that kids don't need to be talked down to, don't need to be coddled when it comes to themes like death, and the "ring around a rosy" is a good example of that. That was something made up by children to describe an epidemic. There's also the rhyme of Lizzie Borden (who murdered her family with a knife or axe) that kids recite as they jump rope.

I must say, people have some very thought provoking things to say on the subject, and I'm quite warming up to the "children's literature" title, although I don't think it limits the themes in the writing, or the gravety with which the themes are presented as some posters have suggested elsewhere on the board. Keep the thoughts coming, please.

- - - - - - - - - -
shadzar - Oct 20, 2006 7:38 pm (#24 of 25)

I think the problem is those throw backs to younger days what was forced onto people to read. But I see no reason to qualify everything that is appropriate material for children as children's literature. Likewise all things that contain explicit material as being adult. It should be said "appropriate for ages X and up" like board games. But then it is still on the individual parents to decide not a publisher or ratings board. Some "children" can handle more mature material involving things that other may not, even if none of the material is "adult" material. Condescending to kids doesn't do any good for them or the people doing it. Its like trying to make all foreign cartoons into something child-friendly. All media forms are not solely for children. Someone should take these other issues that are in books and explain them to children when they come across them. That is where I think this label comes from. Holding off on things that parents, teachers, etc don't want to explain to kids yet cause they don't know how, or think the child isn't ready to deal with it.

Clifford the Big Red Dog, is what i would call a children's book. In 4th grade I already had to read Edgar Allen Poe Tale-Tale Heart which isn't really children's literature. Like those nursery rhymes "Mary, Mary quite contrary" about The death of MAry Queen of SCotts. It is funny how those things are better for children than as SEJones said things like Aesops fables which don't include the violence. Those nursery rhymes are there to start teaching children about death and history, but then they wait another 6-8 years to go into them or maybe even later to explain the rhymes.

- - - - - - - - - -
The Weaslys - Oct 21, 2006 3:51 pm (#25 of 25)

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, for having this discussion! I have enjoyed it so much! I am and always have been an avid reader and now I am leading a young person's reading discussion. I'm ashamed to admit that for years I wouldn't touch any HP and I actively discouraged my kids from reading any. Then I decided to use my brain and formulate my own opinion, thanks to one of my older sons offering to "proofread" it for me! He loved it and still does and so do I and all 6 of my sons! I only wish I could convince the parents of the kids I have in my book group to agree with me and let us discuss HP. JK's books offer a wealth of study for the literary minded person. I've noticed some of the topics (alchemy,mythology) are being discussed in other threads. One thing I think Jo has been very adapt at doing is aging her characters in a very natural way. Although I do think kids in books tend to be a little more mature than kids in "real" life. This must certainly be one reason why she is able to keep her fans and attract new ones, from all age groups. Isn't one test of truly good literature is it's ability to appeal to every age group? Some books I read as a child I still read and enjoy. In fact some, like Pride and Prejudice, I enjoy more now. Harry Potter is like that. I enjoy them more the more I read them. Guess I'm getting wordy! Thanks again, I look forward to keeping up on this post....if only I had a time-turner to give me more to my days!
Elanor
Elanor
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum