No one really knows why Harry Potter became so popular. In fact, many academics find Harry Potter relatively poorly executed, first from a storytelling perspective. Talking about another, better book, Diane Purkiss says the following:
There’s no info dump; there’s no narrator; there’s no Dumbledore figure who in the last chapter plods in and says ‘Harry, I’m going to tell you everything.’ None of that ever happens.
But there are also ideological concerns:
I find the determinism of the sorting hat quite troubling. The idea that you are a Slytherin, you are a Gryffindor. Especially when you’re eleven years old, for God’s sakes. Adults, too. Don’t you find it a bit worrying? It reminds me of Calvinist pre-destination, where from the beginning of time you’re destined to go to the hot place or not.Diane Purkiss
I talk more about the Ideology of the Chosen One in this post.
Harry Potter Fans will of course say that the Harry Potter books sold widely because the books are excellent. But more widely-read specialists of children’s literature don’t accept this reason, because Harry Potter contains nothing that was really new or ground-breaking. Nothing that can be described, anyhow.
In his paper “The Phenomenon of Harry Potter, or Why All the Talk?”Jack Zipes has said that readers “know from beginning to end that Harry will triumph over evil, and this again may be one of the reasons that [J. K. Rowling’s] novels have achieved so much popularity” but this aspect is hardly limited to Harry Potter. Zipes actually criticizes this aspect of Rowling’s series.
Perhaps literature professors are not in the best place to explain Harry Potter’s success. Instead, perhaps this is a job for economists, mathematicians and philosophers.
Harry Potter is popular partly because of timing. In his book Black Swan, Nassim Nicholas Taleb talks about the concept of recursion, and explains that the world has been amassing an increasing number of feedback loops. People bought Harry Potter because other people bought it. Information flows very rapidly in modern society and a fast info society was a necessary prerequisite for the mega success of one series in particular, which probably could just as easily have been another one.
Regarding stories in general, nothing is unique, because everything rests upon the shoulders of what came before:
Readers often assume that each worthwhile story or poem is separate and unique, something that either emerges exclusively from one person’s individual creativity or has been inspired by forces beyond mere human knowledge—a “muse”, perhaps. And certainly, every interesting literary text does express the unique combination of cultural and other forces that make up the imagination of its writer. But writers have repertoires and work from their knowledge of previous texts just as much as readers do. The idea of a story about a detective figuring out which suspect committed a crime doesn’t occur independently to each person who writes a mystery novel. Most mystery writers have read many such texts before deciding to create their own.
The Pleasures Of Children’s Literature, Nodelman and Reimer
The Harry Potter stories are good, solid stories (an ‘enjoyable romp’ according to Kirkus), and no better or worse than many similar tales that came before (and after) it.
Indeed, the stories share qualities with much other children’s fiction. Harry Potter himself is an orphan who, to begin with, lives with rigidly conventional people who are nasty to him—just as child heroes of children’s fiction have been orphaned and misunderstood throughout the history of children’s literature.
The tone of the Potter books, a blend of comedy and melodrama, share’s much with Dahl’s writing in Matilda and in books such as James and the Giant Peach and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. As stories set in a school, meanwhile, the Potter books reproduce the typical conventions of boarding school stories, particularly as represented in British boarding school stories from Thomas Hughes’s Tom Brown’s Schooldays to Frank Richards’s Billy Bunter series: characters of fairly stereotypical types and backgrounds indulging in hijinks, practical jokes, and sporting competitions.
In this case, the novels are fantasies rather than realistic fiction, and the school trains witches and wizards. But that also happens in Ursula Le Guin’s Wizard of Earthsea and Diana Wynne Jones’s Chrestomanci books. [I would add Jill Murphy’s Worst Witch stories.] Furthermore, many other fantasy series share the Potter books’ emphasis on characters maturing into a growing understanding of of their own powers and of the nature of good and evil through contact with unusual beings, not all of them human: not only Le Guin’s Earthsea books but also C.S. Lewis’s Narnia series, Susan Cooper’s Dark Is Rising series, Monica Hughes’s Isis series, and Lloyd Alexander’s Prydain series (which also shares some of the Potter books’ breezy comedy). Like these series, also, the Potter books seem to be heading toward a climactic confrontation between a young protagonist and someone or something powerful, adult, and intensely evil. [Nodelman and Reimer wrote this in the early 2000s — they were right!] Different versions of this plot operate in recent critical successes within the filed of children’s literature such as Philip Pullman’s Golden Compass and Lowry’s The Giver and Gathering Blue, and also in Kristina Applegate’s popular Animorphs series.
Nodelman and Reimer dismiss also the possibility that the Harry Potter books were expertly marketed, because in fact they were marketed no differently from any other book from the same publisher. They posit that the HP books are so successful precisely because they are a perfect blend of what has come before. Blending genres is the hardest thing to do. Perhaps what Rowling did was the children’s literature equivalent of this.
Jack Zipes is less impressed than many children’s literature critics with the Harry Potter series. In a critical essay on the first four Harry Potter books, Zipes expresses disappointment that so many people working in children’s literature today as critics and taste makers speak in glowing terms about the mediocre but nevertheless phenomenal series by Joanne Rowling without seeming to have read the books which came before and which, in some cases are superior works of literature.
WHAT TO READ ALONGSIDE HARRY POTTER
In Sticks and Stones, Zipes recommends the works of:
William Mayne — an English writer for children who is nonetheless notoriously under-read by children but read by adults. He published books between 1953 and 2009, but you may not have heard of any of them. You can still get your hands on A Swarm In May and a few others.
Joan Aiken — English writer specialising in supernatural fiction and children’s alternate history novels such as The Wolves of Willoughby Chase
Rosemary Sutcliff — British author well known for historical retellings of myths and legends
Ursula LeGuin — American author well known for fantasy and science fiction works for children, for example the Earthsea series
Janni Howker — British author of fewer novels than the above writers, as well as short fiction
Diana Wynne Jones — See: How Diana Wynne Jones Changed My Life by Judith at Misrule.
“When I was a child, I would read absolutely anything. My favourite books for younger people would be I Capture the Castle by Dodie Smith, which I really love, The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge, all the classic children’s books. I love E Nesbit—I think she is great and I identify with the way that she writes. Her children are very real children and she was quite a groundbreaker in her day.”
Some of these authors you have probably heard of — others may be new. In any case, if you know of a reader suffering from Harry Potter withdrawal after reading the final volume, point them in the direction of his formidable ancestors.
The most influential children’s author over the past century is E. Nesbit. I list the reasons in this post.
15 Books As Enchanting As Harry Potter from Julia Seales
Witch, Please is a fortnightly podcast about the Harry Potter world by two lady scholars
Parents have always turned to books they know for their children, but she also believes Harry Potter started a new era of “collective reading”: “The notion of being a private reader with your own book was completely turned on its head.” This is good in some ways, she thinks, but it means “publishers can’t resist publishing celebrities, because half the work is done for them. Some celebrities do write good books – but you have to hope it’s a stepping stone to other things and often, it isn’t.”Famous first words: how celebrities made their way on to children’s bookshelves