Quoted below is her argument that the Harry Potter series are not classics and that they should have never been viewed as such.
Oh, the power of the printed word. And on that subject A S Byatt is right.
Master Potter is a global triumph … millions of children back to reading, thank Christ for that, but classic in the longevity stakes? I don't think so. A classic is more than a smash hit; it has to have something to do with inspiration and a great deal more to do with some inexplicable magic that places one word before another to create a rhythm and form that defies analysis and, like all art, there is the great, the good and the fabulously successful, but then there is genius.
"Once upon a time, a very long time ago now, last Friday, Winnie the Pooh lived in a forest", or "Before the high and far-off times, oh my best beloved, came the time of the Very Beginnings and that was in the days when the eldest magician was getting things ready", or "Once upon a time, on an uninhabited island on the shores of the Red Sea, there lived a Parsee from whose hat the rays of the sun were reflected in more than oriental splendour" - classic!
I might add that Kendall is forgetting one very important thing: The Harry Potter series were inspired, and in this particular case that inspiration came from a ride on the subway when JK Rowling happened to be looking out at a pasture with cows dotted across its length. The inspiration for the Potter series happened quite unexpectedly and suddenly. Would this not be categorized as "genius" or as a "genius moment," drawing upon preliminary mental images of this incredibly rich world in a single point in time?
To read the rest of this opinion, click
here
.
You must verify your e-mail address before you can post comments.
Reader Comments (27) 
Your Thoughts
Witch
Points: 979
Butterbeer says:
WELL I WOULDNT CALL THE HP BOOKS CLASSICS...AT LEAST NOT YET. I HAVE READ EACH BOOK ABOUT 10 TIMES (OK SO IVE ONLY READ THE 5TH ONE TWICE, BUT ALL THE OTHERS...10 MAY BE AN UNDERSTATEMET). HARRY POTTER IS A GREAT AND WONDERFUL SELECTION OF BOOKS BUT I DONT THINK THAT IT HAS EARNED ITS RIGHT AS A CLASSIC YET. DONT GET ME WORNG NOW, I LOVE THE HP BOOKS ALOT BUT I STILL THINK THAT THEY NEED THEIR TIME OUT THERE. YEAH I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE THINKING, NEW YORK TIMES BEST SELLER (ALL 5 BOOKS IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY) AND IM SURE IT WAS JSUT THE SAME IN ENGLAND AND MANY MORE COUNTRIES ACCROSS THE WORLD. HAARY POTTER HAS NOT MADE ITS TIME TO BE CONSIDED A CLASSIC, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT IT WONT GET THERE SOME DAY THOUGH. ROMEO AND JULIET, A TALE OF TWO CITIES...THOSE ARE CLASSICS, BUT WE JUST HAVE TO GIVE HARRY TIME TO MATURE IN TO HIS CLASSIC STAGE. IT WILL COME, SOONER OR LATER!
MODERATOR'S NOTE: PLEASE DO NOT YELL! ;-)
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 1:28 AM EST
Hufflepuff Princess
Points: 24832
Waddi Wasi says:
Just because the HP books are not classics now, does not mean they will not be in the future. If you think that people are going to stop reading, say, ten years from now, you're wrong! There will still be HP fans, myself as one of them, and lots of people all around the world will still read old, faded, stained but cherised copies of the books.
How's that for ironic?
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 2:19 AM EST
Wizard
Points: 993
Muggle Wizard says:
Um, what makes a classic? I think it really is just the test of time. And the interesting thing is (as far as I can tell, anyway) that I don't think JKR really cares. If it turns out to be a classic, great! If it doesn't, it's still an awfully good series of books. Why people have to jump to conclusions over something that, at least in my opinion, isn't all that important is beyond me.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 2:32 AM EST
Hufflepuff Princess
Points: 24832
Waddi Wasi says:
Naw, I don't think she does either. She just wants people to enjoy her books. We shouldn't get so riled up.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 2:45 AM EST
Order of Merlin, 2nd Class
Points: 1783
Juno Puddifoot says:
Nah it doesn't really matter, but my 2 knuts worth is that they will be classics, in time. Look at Charles Dickens and Mark Twain, there was always a clamour when, well the former at least, released a new part of a serial. They were 'popular' writers, hell so was Shakespeare.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 6:53 AM EST
Points: 351
Imelda Moonshine says:
Harry will stand the test of time, i know he will.Until then though, i suppose we'll have to put up with people like this.sigh.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 9:39 AM EST
Points: 245
Tonks510 says:
I am so sure tha HP will be a classic because all kids and Teens everywhere can relate to him. THat to me is something special.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 9:56 AM EST
Healer for all Occasions
Points: 3570
Madam Malkin says:
Sure I agree, Harry Potter is not a classic. YET. I think it will be someday. And do you know why Harry is a smash hit? Did you ever think of that? Becuase it is good. Because it is genius. Who else writes like she does? I'm not saying there are no other good writers out there. That would be a stupid and completely untrue thing to say. But every writer has a unique style and story. This one is a very unique story that captures anyone (assuming they have an open mind and know a good story when they see one). Before you go and call Harry Potter nothing more than a smash hit, you may want to think about why it is a smash hit. And you will be sorry when years from now Harry Potter is indeed considered a classic. He's not yet, but you wait. and even if it is never official that it is a classic years from now, it will always be a classic to the loyal fans.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 11:09 AM EST
Head Girl
Points: 479
eclektic says:
time is the essence of tranforming something into a classic. this means as well that jkr's books are not some flash in the pan success or a one hit wonder.
about the whole once upon a time thing[i/] being 'classic', im terribly sorry but this is a load of dung to me. authors now that make use of such literary devices only show how UNimaginative and UNinspired they are for employing such repetitious, dull and unvaried techniques. this is hardly inspiring and while this may be a work of [i]genius a century ago, it plain ole boring to me.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 3:13 PM EST
Squib
Points: 189
willow80 says:
Yes, Harry Potter isn't a classic. At least not now. Like everyone has said, give it time and I am sure it will be. A classic to me are books that are know by all and of all ages because the writing is great and the stories inside these books draw you in to there worlds. Dickens does that and so does Rowelling. And a book I believe become a classic because they are past from generation to genration. From a grandparent telling their grandchild or a parent telling their child, or a sister/brother telling the other about a book they read once. And books that are classics or become classic are talked about in school, to teach the students the different forms of writing possible and what you can learn from them.
So again, harry Potter may not be considered a classin now, but it will be, because it has all the makings of becoming one. and I plan on saving my HP books to pass along to my children (when I have children that is), so they to can read about the magical world of Harry Potter. And learn about a great writer like JKR.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 3:17 PM EST
Old Chortlebones
Points: 2601
Newt Scamander says:
"An Ode to Felicity Kendal"
by Newt Scamander
Once upon a time (classic!),
A very long time ago (brilliant!),
Last Friday (absolutely marvelous!),
On an uninhabitated island (great!),
A seagull [defecated] on a rock,
And Miss Felecity Kendal was born.
Not my best prose, no, but it does have a certain ring to it, eh?
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 4:39 PM EST
Witch
Points: 611
Mdm Rosmerta says:
The Books of Byatt are alright. However they do not compare to the Harry Potter books. The last time anyone was so eagerly anticipating the next big instalment of a book is a long time ago (fifty or a hundred years). I think that this million billion sales of OOTP is a good indication that Harry's magic will last a long time.
Another thing - classics are classics because they area sign of the times they were written in. Harry fits in in this time - and years from now people will want to read them again to understand how we are thinking in this day and age.
Posted Jul 19, 2003 at 4:40 PM EST
Muggle
Points: 57
Mrs. Norris says:
I'm sorry to say that I agree-The Harry Potter series are not quite 'classics' level yet. I have yet to see teachers assigning it for summer reading (but that'd be SO gweat if they did! I'm not enjoying 'The Jungle'). They do lack the certain message except-maybe-to have faith and believe 'anything is possible'. But, then again, I haven't found a message in The Jungle except that Upton Sinclaire switched from past to present tense! I don't know. I think in year's to come Harry Potter WILL BE a classic, but not now.
Posted Jul 20, 2003 at 12:27 AM EST
Professor
Points: 1106
Ima Quidditch Fan says:
From Webster:
Main Entry: 1clas·sic
Pronunciation: 'kla-sik
Function: adjective
Etymology: French or Latin; French classique, from Latin classicus of the highest class of Roman citizens, of the first rank, from classis
Date: circa 1604
1 a : serving as a standard of excellence : of recognized value b : TRADITIONAL, ENDURING c : characterized by simple tailored lines in fashion year after year
2 : of or relating to the ancient Greeks and Romans or their culture : CLASSICAL
3 a : historically memorable b : noted because of special literary or historical associations
4 a : AUTHENTIC, AUTHORITATIVE b : TYPICAL
5 capitalized : of or relating to the period of highest development of Mesoamerican and especially Mayan culture about A.D. 300-900
If one reviews the definition of classic, it is clear that the series is serving as a standard of excellence and one of recognized value to millions of people.
But if someone wants to doubt it, well, whatever…
Posted Jul 20, 2003 at 3:21 PM EST
Snape's Woman
(Moderator)
Points: 5392
Prof. Andaxia Moonstar says:
I agree with most of the people here - HP is not a classic, YET. Give it time and it surely will be. The series is treasured by the entire world - Americans, British, Germans, Russians, Japanese, etc. For every nationality, every culture, every age, and both genders to have latched onto the same books and identify with them, that to me marks the beginnings of a classic.
Posted Jul 20, 2003 at 4:47 PM EST
Hufflepuff Princess
Points: 24832
Waddi Wasi says:
Andaxia Moonstar- You're right. HP is just a famous series of books that are widely read all around the globe. One day, years from now, they will be thought of as classic because the represent people from this timeframe. JK is wonderful-- she never mentions any kind of name-brands because she doesn't want the books to be out-dated. Very smart :D
Posted Jul 20, 2003 at 6:25 PM EST
Professor
Points: 1065
Lerah99 says:
Grae,
Well put! JK Rowling will be remembered as a rags to riches tale, even if Harry Potter never becomes a classic. But, Byatt and Kendal will be remembered, if at all, as the lost women. The hollow women. Headpieces filled with straw...(sorry, I couldn't resist. I'm a huge TS Elliot fan.)
Posted Jul 20, 2003 at 8:33 PM EST
Witch
Points: 661
Flitterbloom says:
I'd call them classics. I'm going to try hard not to get too upset with this woman, because i've gotten upset enough at Ms. Byatt and Ms. Coombs for their feelings towards the books, but I am really upset that people are still putting the books into the shredder and hoping that we all do too. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think people who want to express their opinion purly to get hate mail or more publicity need to keep their opinions to themselves..
Posted Jul 21, 2003 at 11:09 AM EST
Head Girl
Points: 468
Charlie'sMum says:
Sigh. I always liked Felicity Kendall. For those of you who were born in the late 70's or 80's, Felicity Kendall is a British Actress who starred in shows like "Good Neighbours" and "Solo". Good Neighbours was about a couple who chucked the high life to be self-sufficent on a farm. It was funny. My high School boyfriend was in love with her. "Vivian" on the Young Ones (GREAT early 80's Brit-Com - on DVD, get it) summed her up thusly, "Felicity 'Treacle' Kendall.
Anyway, I totally disagree with her - she said that classics "has to have something to do with inspiration and a great deal more to do with some inexplicable magic that places one word before another to create a rhythm and form" - this is exactly what I like about HP. Don't know what book she read. That being said, not everyone has the same taste. I never liked Winnie-the-Pooh, but she obviously enjoys the plodding Victorian children's stories that we've been subjected to for years. (nothing against Rudyard Kipling, I enjoyed Just So Stories, but they are a bit condcending.) So, as others have said, we really won't know if they are classics until some time has passed. No such thing as an instant classic, by definition of the word, "classic". The problem with HP is it is popular, and many times people equate popular with mediocore. Or they refuse to believe something could be both appreciated and good.
Posted Jul 22, 2003 at 8:26 AM EST
Auror
Points: 2303
padfoot5312 says:
I agree that HP isn't a classic yet, but only time will tell. We have other books that aren't classic, so what. I had my children read books that I read that I enjoyed - guess what they found them interesting too. So, I feel that HP will be read for a long time.
Posted Jul 23, 2003 at 11:30 PM EST
Witch
Points: 841
evangalista says:
No, its not a classic yet, the definition of a classic alone should tell you that, and only time will tell if it will be. I love HP and my children love HP and Im sure my grandchildren will love HP and on and on...thats all that matters...who cares if its considered a classic, it will be read on and on and on...
Posted Jul 28, 2003 at 5:53 PM EST
Prefect
Points: 333
HarryPotterNutcase says:
Man some people will do just about anything for attention won't they.....pity everyone has to be so jealous of JKR.
Posted Aug 30, 2003 at 12:43 PM EST
Professional Beater
Points: 20891
feltonluver says:
WHAT That is ridiculous! Okay I really think these books are going to be remembered, and they will be considered classics... to me they are PERIOD!
Posted Feb 29, 2004 at 8:43 PM EST
Witch
Points: 596
let the truth be told says:
Not being a classic yet doesnt mean it wont be. For heaven sake its not old enough to have passed through generations and be a classic, although I love the books and if when im older i have children i will read it to them, because frankly I think its an amazing series..the best
Posted Jun 25, 2004 at 4:42 PM EST
Mediwitch
Points: 2608
nickyole1 says:
Harry Pooter WILL become classics in the future, trust me. Now, why wouldn't they? OS many copies have been sold, and they have gotten millions of kids to read.
Posted Jul 18, 2004 at 1:13 PM EST
The Gryffindor Guy
Points: 2727
z Jamie Potter z says:
Just because the HP books are not classics now, does not mean they will not be in the future. If you think that people are going to stop reading, say, ten years from now, you're wrong! There will still be HP fans, myself as one of them.
Posted Mar 19, 2005 at 9:05 AM EST
Back to top of page