Like A Rowling Stone

There was a really interesting article on Guardian.co.uk back in May, which looks into whether JK Rowling is accepted as a fantasy writer, or whether the world of critics and academics are sexist towards her (and other female sci-fi/fantasy writers). I meant to blog about it at the time, but a lot has been happening... So here are my thoughts.

Firstly, the article is here.

There are a few things that I picked up on particularly. Firstly, the quote from Michael Rosen, which was jumped on by the media the week before that for being anti-Potter... He was quoted in the Scottish Sunday times as saying that the Potter books are rather hard-going for children under six. Well, that's right, surely? Why is that controversial or anti-Potter? That's no more a criticism than saying Shakespeare is difficult for toddlers. The books are full of heavy themes and events - things that a lot of adults struggle to comprehend. Michael Rosen is not the Children's Laureate by good fortune. He knows what he's talking about - I'm not sure there are many who understand and promote storytelling better. And yet, his comments were interpreted as meaning that the books were unreadable.

Secondly, and I hadn't paid attention to the criticisms of JKR before now - I was content just to read and enjoy the books, enjoying the storytelling and the escapism - but the comments of AS Byatt are snobbish and ignorant. If you don't know what this is about, she has said that the popularity of the Potter books is because they are "written for people whose imaginative lives are confined to TV cartoons, and the exaggerated (more exciting, not threatening) mirror-worlds of soaps, reality TV and celebrity gossip." Sounds disturbingly like jealousy to me... Very unseemly for an extremely well-respected novelist, poet and Dame of the British Empire...

I, for one, don't fall into the target audience Byatt suggests, and I find it offensive to be pigeon-holed like that. If you don't like it, fine, but I don't see what right you have to condemn others. It's easy to read - maybe not all that deep and meaningful (to me), but its a nice escape from a world that is increasingly becoming dark and corrupt. You write what moves you - and you know what you're talking about there. But Rowling wrote what she felt she had to - and there's no doubt that she knows what she's on about in that realm.

Another point in the article was about Rowling being invited to give Harvard's graduation day commencement address this June. The reaction from students was not altogether positive. This is from the Guardian article:

Writing in the university paper, the Harvard Crimson, student Adam Goldenberg rips into Rowling as "a flash in the pan", "a petty pop culture personality" who "tricked parents into letting their kids read books filled with sex, murder, and homosexual role models". Furthermore, "writing bedtime stories is lame".

What utter, utter crap. I'm going to sound like I'm JKR's press officer now, but I have to disagree. A flash in the pan - seven books worth. Does that make seven flashes in seven pans? A highly successful movie series isn't exactly half an hour’s work either...

Petty pop culture personality - the way she's handled her fame, and riches - the philanthropic and compassionate way she's dealt with it all makes that comment every bit as ignorant as AS Byatt's jealous rant. Writing articles about subjects you clearly know nothing about isn't the way to cultivate respect...

I'll skip the tricking parents thing, as I think its nuts - OK there's murder in there, but sex? No more than kids would have experienced growing up, and homosexual role models - that maybe true, but when you're not told a character is homosexual until well after the books are published, it kind of diminishes the effect. And what's wrong with a homosexual role model anyway? That would make two ‘isms’ from Mr Goldenberg in one comment. Good going there...

"Writing bedtime stories is lame." That comment is just so wrong that I actually feel violently-inclined to this whingeing, envious wheeze bag. As a parent, I love reading stories with Luke. I have always loved stories and storytelling, and I am a huge fan of children’s or “young adult” books - because they tend to be more creative and imaginative. I read plenty of bona fide adult fiction and non-fiction too, mind you. But that only sharpens my appreciation to it all. I don't think I would enjoy either one half as much without the other. Writing a bedtime story is every little bit as legitimate, literary and commendable as writing a historical novel, or a thesis on the US constitution.

In general, I agree with the point of the article - novels of this genre are generally only talked up if they are written by men - Philip Pullman, Garth Nix, Darren Shan, Philip Reeve et al. But there are female writers who produce books of a quality matching, if not surpassing them - Diana Wynne Jones and Marjorie Blackman are two that spring to mind immediately. Both of those I discovered through recommendations, having seen nothing of their work advertised or hyped up in the press to the same extent as the male authors quoted.

People like different things. Lord of the Rings is pretty good, I think - but I don't consider it to be that good to deserve obsession and repeated readings. Or a musical. When you strip that down to its bare bones, it’s essentially a fairly tedious road trip story. Albeit a road trip with tiny men in possession of huge hairy feet. And a fiery thing at the end. And orks. I did enjoy it, but I also got very bored at various points.

JK Rowling has achieved what she has through hard work - and in the process she's stimulated millions of minds (not just those of children), and made reading popular with many, many children once more - in an age where the internet and TV rule without competition. How on earth, with clear conscience, can you criticise that?

Unless she’s selling more books than you, of course…