Ok, one last post on the debate. Aol, recently posted a news article with the top ten books to read before you die. Here is the link:
http://shopping.aol.com/articles/2008/07/08/10-books-to-read-before-you-die/
As you can see, Harry Potter comes in ahead of To Kill A Mockingbird at number four (alas, Oz books are forgotten). This is just one of
many things I have seen like this proving that Harry Potter deserves it's spot. Entertainment weekly named it number two out of top 100 novels. There are dozens(if not hundreds) of articals supporting my clam. Harry Potter is classic and we have never seen anything like this in the literature. Give credit where due. Stop falling short. Don't debate to debate. Go big or go home...
Having read neither the
Wizard of Oz nor any of the
Potter series, I won't weigh into the substantive argument over which is better. However, I can tell you that citing an
AOL list that admittedly "is based on the results of a Harris Poll that asked 2,413 U.S. adults to name their favorite books" doesn't lend much credence to your argument. The Da Vinci Code? There's one that I have read, and I can tell you that it wouldn't be on a top 1,000 list of literary classics, let alone a top 10. Just because something is popular does not mean it's a classic (the general public often has poor or simplistic taste).
Something being poorly written may not be the sole criterion for whether it's a classic. If the story is really that good, it may be able to overcome less-than-stellar writing. The converse is also true. I've heard accounts that
Finnegans Wake is absolutely brilliant. However, its so utterly incomprehensible to most even very well educated people (I think I got about 7 pages in before giving up) that it doesn't pass muster as a classic.
In short, all I'm saying is that there are plenty of reasons why certain pieces of literature could be considered classics, not just the quality of the writing. I'll briefly add that as tenable of a position as you may have about
Potter being a classic, you'll find that many are reluctant to admit it as a classic due to its age. I suppose that's just snobbery or pretentiousness of the academicians (so you may well be right, but many might not admit it). :shrug:
I've got to agree with you. I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes but I am in no way interested in Harry Potterland (or whatever it's called).
Neither are my parents and their friends, neither is my sister and her husband (and his family), neither are any of my friends who went to see Harry Potter at 12 am in the theatre.
I told 7 pr 8 people about the new land and all the money Universal was putting into it; how great the rides are supposed to be.... (anticipating their excitement) and their responses all we're "Oh? Really? That's Cool." It was in a humoring tone. Of the several times I mentioned it, not one had a follow-up question or seemed interested.
I don't think Harry Potter will fall on it's face. I know there are people in other parts of the country that are anticipating the opening... But I don't know anyone who will be visiting UO on account of it... I also think the people on this site are an inaccurate sample of the general public and will generally be more likely to visit than Joe Sixpack.
From a business standpoint, anecdotal accounts like these also don't make a big difference to
Disney. 98% of the population may shorten their time at WDW and go to Universal on account of HP, but that 2% that will is enough cause for concern as the short term affect it will have on profits (I'm not suggesting this will be the actual number, I think it will be higher, but for argument sake, let's assume it is). Even losing some business to Universal on account of Potter is losing too much. Interestingly, if HP only brings 2% of Disney's business to Universal, it might be cause for concern for Universal itself--in that the return on investment won't be high enough on HP. That would be a long-term gain for Disney, but in today's short-sighted corporate world, I think the negative short-term impact, however slight (or large), has Disney concerned to some degree.
