Welcome to Writers Talkback. If you are a new user, your account will have to be approved manually to prevent spam. Please bear with us in the meantime
Oooooh-errr, missus! Well, this has been a fun debate, clearly! Anyway, as for writing quality, I'd vote Dickens any time over JKR and I've read lots of both - Rowling could have tightened up her writing so much more than she did and kept it exciting (children still read it though).
Visionary? I think they have both been in their own times and in their own ways... it depends on what aspect of visionary you mean. Dickens' writing is timeless and still stands up, mainly driven by characters and set in places and times that we can still relate to. Can we do that with Rowling? I don't know.
As someone who works in a busy library, all I know is that Blyton is still borrowed by kids just as much as she used to be. Whether she was visionary or escapist is another matter. I do believe that Dickens saw things a-coming; Rowling doesn't appear to ever speak or project towards a future that is any different from the status quo.
I admit I can't judge JKR's work - but some may have noticed I have never tried to. To be so unkind to Dorothy is unnecessary, as we all have our opinions as to who is better. The reason I started this thread was to see what other people thought of the result of this poll, not so that people could use it to insult each other.
All literature is subjective and just because something is literary doesn't make it better than everything else.
To say Dickens's characters were two-dimensional, though, is a little short-sighted in my opinion.
Candy, if that remark was intended to cause hurt it failed.
At least one good thing that has come from University is that people have confirmed to me that I can write.
So now after having struggled to have written three essays in two weeks, and having received grades of upper seconds and firsts, it seems as though I will have to rethink my time contributions to this forum. I would hate my grades to slump because of one petty remark.
Don't lets have another problem like earlier in the year people.
Sometimes we say things in a way that can be misconstrued. On others it's a disagreement on strongly held opinions.
We are all different, it's bound to happen sometimes.
Let's not fall out.
I think at times there is a bit of an over reaction to a statement. James said I was being arrogant, but the ! was the equivalent of a :) which I don't normally do. It obviously got missed. I could dispute many of the statements made in this thread, and back it up with evidence, but I won't, for fear of prolonging any arguments. What we should not do, ever, is call anyone here a wannabe writer. We are all writers, in one form or another, working in one field or another, and should be here to support one another, not snarl and snap. I have already mentioned on another thread that one person has left Talkback through comments which were made, a thread she did not like, let's not send someone else out into the wilderness through comments. This is a support forum, and should remain that way. And, please, if I add ! to something, it's lighthearted, people, I don't always think of the :) If I wish to do a smiley when sending IMs I use the emoticons. There are no emoticons here.
I've only just read this thread. It's very interesting indeed. As a working class lad of 10 - almost 11 - struggling to read, a teacher read a section of Oliver Twist to her class every afternoon before home time. I became so interested that I wanted to read the story for myself - I was soon reading! Dickens is still one of my favourite writers. I've also read all the JKR books and enjoyed them all except number 6 which I found slow in pace - though the ending is good.
Thanks for that post Dorothy - I misconstrued what you'd written the same way as James did and I was a bit surprised - I appreciate the clarification.
Candy and Stirling, please heed Carol. We're all entitled to our own opinions but they are only that - opinions.
I'm a relative newcomer to the site but if I had been a total newcomer I would have left if I thought that airing my opinion would lead to a personal attack.
For what it's worth, having read both, I'm not a great fan of either Dickens or Rowling!
Great Expectations is the one that sticks with me. Love the characters. The Harry Potter books were a great read too, for me. I would like to think that neither of these two writers sat down one day (or, more appropriately, one dark and stormy night! :-)) and thought to themselves 'Let's write a book/books that will rock the writing/reading world for years/decades to come and make them think their socks off.' I would like to think they wrote because they wanted to, because they had to, like all of us here do. Dickens achieved international success with a lot of hard work and in an age where there was no televison, radio or internet, only newspapers and word of mouth. Ms Rowling achieved hers with a lot of hard work and the subsequent assistance of our modern, and let's face it, sometimes crazy media, including the film industry. Who knows how the writers of the future will achieve success? (Let it not involve DNA please :-)!) As to the whole visionary issue, it will be a subjective point of view for everyone. Again, I doubt these two writers wrote down on their To Do list: Must make sure above work not only rocks the world but becomes a visionary statement. It's a subjective interpretation of how their work is looked at. Who knows what might happen in a hundred years' time? Maybe we will be flying on broomsticks and solve some of the world's pollution problems! And housework done with magic? Oh come on, who can say no to that? And, maybe, just maybe, we'll still be around, old, wrinkled as a prune, gummy beyond belief, on our last zimmer frames, popping pills that give us everlasting life (... or, more scarily, we'll be young and supple still, courtesy of our clones from the DNA data base ... paranoid, me? :-))
This thread has got a bit bitchy at times. \i agree with everyone who says that we are here for one another. i agree with good debate, it's what keeps us going, but please let's not lose the plot.
Call me old fashion but did Dickens have the same kind of expert marketing,PA,so much of the advance advertising as JK??? Both of them are visionaries, but from different eras.
Basically Dickens did what most unknown hard working writers do, he went out and promoted himself and his writing. Plus he gave the audience what they wanted.
I'd just like to point out that this was exactly what JK Rowling did in the beginning. People forget (or choose not to notice) that the first 2 Harry Potter books had very little marketing behind them. They got popular on word of mouth alone. So much so that by the time book 3 was ready for launch, the publishers realised that they had a sizeable cult on their hands - and *THAT* was when the mass media machine started to go into overdrive.
Having said that, none of this makes either JKR or Dickens qualified for "visionary" status, necessarily.
Visionary? Who else has read 1984? Go on and put your hand up. (apologies to those above, I have scan-read the thread)
Asimov?
Even, and I'm stretching it here... Ben Elton!
I don't read Ben Elton, I lie and say I do, to those who like him but I don't ... I have read 1984 several times, it gets scarier every time I read it. And that is scary in itself, as I see the world becoming more like his book with every passing year. Asimov, yes, the great man himself, a tremendous visionary. I never did understand his science articles in - hell! Was it F&SF or the other American SF magazine I used to devour as if I was starving.
Personally I think Ben Elton is brilliant in the stories he has written. His insight is quite amazing. Yes I have read 1984, Animal Farm and what about Aldous Huxley 'Brave New World'?
I have 2 of Ben Elton's books. I bought them fully expecting to love them, because I always loved his stand up shows, but I just don't get them. They do absolutely nothing for me.
I wouldn't think Dickens could be compared to Rowling because in the end, Dickens wrote for adults even though some of his stories are universally known even among children (i.e. Oliver Twist and Christmas Carol) and Rowling ended up writing for children even though for some inexplicable reason she says it was meant to be aimed at adults. i found them both enjoyable, though Dickens was especially because we have a board game called The Dickens Game, which promotes David Copperfield, Great Expectations, Oliver Twist and Christmas Carol.
And Michelle Magorian (Goodnight Mister Tom) gets my vote any time as usual.
I'm with you Mutley on Ben Elton - think he's a marvellously funny writer, but hate his stand up 'rants'. Let us not forget that he also co-wrote the Black Adder series, too.
Tessadragon, can't help noticing that 'Magorian' was the name of one of the centaurs in the Harry Potter books - wonder if that was a reference to Michelle Magorian? I know JK did things like that - there are famous names dotted throughout. The one that most amuses me is the 'Dai Llewellyn Ward' at the wizard hospital! I often wonder what he did to deserve that!
Comments
Visionary? I think they have both been in their own times and in their own ways... it depends on what aspect of visionary you mean. Dickens' writing is timeless and still stands up, mainly driven by characters and set in places and times that we can still relate to. Can we do that with Rowling? I don't know.
As someone who works in a busy library, all I know is that Blyton is still borrowed by kids just as much as she used to be. Whether she was visionary or escapist is another matter. I do believe that Dickens saw things a-coming; Rowling doesn't appear to ever speak or project towards a future that is any different from the status quo.
All literature is subjective and just because something is literary doesn't make it better than everything else.
To say Dickens's characters were two-dimensional, though, is a little short-sighted in my opinion.
At least one good thing that has come from University is that people have confirmed to me that I can write.
So now after having struggled to have written three essays in two weeks, and having received grades of upper seconds and firsts, it seems as though I will have to rethink my time contributions to this forum. I would hate my grades to slump because of one petty remark.
Sometimes we say things in a way that can be misconstrued. On others it's a disagreement on strongly held opinions.
We are all different, it's bound to happen sometimes.
Let's not fall out.
Candy and Stirling, please heed Carol. We're all entitled to our own opinions but they are only that - opinions.
I'm a relative newcomer to the site but if I had been a total newcomer I would have left if I thought that airing my opinion would lead to a personal attack.
For what it's worth, having read both, I'm not a great fan of either Dickens or Rowling!
Love it!
Having said that, none of this makes either JKR or Dickens qualified for "visionary" status, necessarily.
Asimov?
Even, and I'm stretching it here... Ben Elton!
Animal Farm and 1984 are more my kind of thing.
And Michelle Magorian (Goodnight Mister Tom) gets my vote any time as usual.
Tessadragon, can't help noticing that 'Magorian' was the name of one of the centaurs in the Harry Potter books - wonder if that was a reference to Michelle Magorian? I know JK did things like that - there are famous names dotted throughout. The one that most amuses me is the 'Dai Llewellyn Ward' at the wizard hospital! I often wonder what he did to deserve that!