Book Critics discuss Harry Potter (2000)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 авг 2016
- Janet Maslin, Malcolm Jones and Mark Gleason discuss the popularity of the Harry Potter book series. With an appearance by Harold Bloom.
Join us on Patreon! / manufacturingintellect
Donate Crypto! commerce.coinbase.com/checkou...
Share this video! 
Развлечения
Join us on Patreon! www.patreon.com/ManufacturingIntellect
Donate Crypto! commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/868d67d2-1628-44a8-b8dc-8f9616d62259
Share this video!
Charlie: "What are you saying? Are million and million and millions of people wrong?"
Bloom: "I'm afraid so."
Not a second's hesitation.
Bloom made a fool of himself though, let's be honest.
haha like Harry potter but that was funny
Sheridan Burton
it would be IMPOSSIBLE to hesitate on something so CERTAIN
No, just stated his opinion. There's no accounting for taste. Plus, in the realm of popular culture a lot of sub-par art (not saying that's the case with HP) gain a greater level of popularity than they actually rate. Look at Madonna for instance, had she not arrived on the scene when music videos were taking off she would likely have been a middling artist. I was never overly impressed by them but this has always been the case. There has always been the "hot author" who wasn't the best author.
@Milo O' Rourke There is no "right or wrong" just opinion. He was right for him. This his opinion
You mean to tell me every best seller or popular movie/show everyone loved, you loved also? Every time?
I like that Harold Bloom was the smartest person in any room, yet he looked and breathed like the guy at the flea market who closes his booth early because its hot.
smart why? Because he has an edgy take?
@@dericmederos1514 Because he read every culturally relevant work of fiction and understood what each meant and could tell you plot points, character motivations, and recite at least a page of poetry or prose without looking at the book.
@@CleanFamilyVideos Correction; he read everything relevant to HIM. he was a snob
@@dericmederos1514 Agreed!I would say he was smart and snob at the same time!
@@dericmederos1514 he was passionate about what he loved more than anything and I’ll listen to someone like that before I listen to someone who gets offended by it
Watching this 16 years later is awesome.
20 years here
Especially now that Rowling has extended the Harry Potter-verse with writing unimaginative and pretty bad prequel stories and sequel story.
@@mabusestestament Just shut up already, will you?
Don't be silly, Serban
His teeth are nice though
These people are critics for newspapers, magazines - they are marketing to the masses all the time. That's how they make their living. They are certainly not in the same league as the literature professor.
No, they are above him!
they are below him.
@@papagen00 Not when it comes to Harry Potter!
I think they value different things in literature. The professor would looks at the way the language was used and at that aspect HP books fell short. While from a readers pov, it was the emotion connection that was matter more, and the writting is just the cherry on top.
@@serban8298 Well, since Harry Potter is a negative, they're above him of course. Because it's upside down.
His permanent smile is scaring me...
he gives off a bit of a Norman Bates with aspey vibe
@@antonandraslindamoodwhite5407 there is a bit of Norman there for shoo
He's very muggle'ish.
Talks through his smile ...... GAWD!!!
You’re all telling me you’re not dorks too? This guy’s just a dork that got to talk about HP on Charlie Rose. He seems sweet! Much love to him!
I love Bloom, but I'm very happy Janet Maislin stood her ground.
The schools were only gender segregated in the movies, NOT the books.
And the movies are not cannon!
No, the common rooms where segregated. Or only the girls rooms at least
Witches = girls. Wizards = boys. That's gender segregation. Plus the common rooms.
Saying that Harry Potter was just going to be a faze really got me. It's almost been 20 years since this interview and wow they really didn't realise exactly how big it would get.
Because of the media age.
@@ViolentFEAR You're always finding excuses to move the discussion in your direction!Harry Potter is a masterpiece that deserves every reader that it has!
@@serban8298 true
is mcdonalds great food because it's the biggest restaurant chain in the world? is britney spears great music because she sold shit tons of records?
@@okyouknowwhatever Harry Potter isn't the fast food of literature, but you're just to close minded to understand it!There is a lot of morality in those books for those with an open mind!
My favorite part of this video was learning that there is such a thing as "Book Magazine".
And of course it was not fair to take HP off the Best Seller list. That was blatant insult. I knew more adults reading HP than children and many of the people who started reading kept reading as adults
That shouldn't be surprising. According to George Carlin, there's a magazine for everything. Even for walking;)
m.ruclips.net/video/i2PiDtHbLOY/видео.html
I am one of them. Knew about it scene before I could even read, and started reading the books when I was 10. After watching 1to4 movies. And now I am 27.
Professor Bloom reminds me of Professor Binns.
Janet maslin was so spot on in this interview. Everything shes said has come to pass.
You enjoy slop, but that's okay. Most people are peasants who sniff their own farts and enjoy consuming slop, and you are very much among them. :)
@@pygmalioninvenus6057 And you are a worthless snob who doesn't know what he's talking about!Just like Harold Bloom, you're dead wrong!
Potty book.
@@pygmalioninvenus6057 ?
@@pygmalioninvenus6057 wow, how does one reach such a conclusion without giving any sensible reason but “slop”?
Why wasn't Harold Bloom a part of this discussion to school these people?
Joshua L Prof. Bloom cannot be bothered with period pieces.
I think we know why 😅😅
He was apart from it, but wasn't a part of it.
IKR? Shame, really. RIP. He was a wealth of literary knowledge.
Because he would have made a fool of himself again!
Imagine being a New York Times book reviewer and having the nerve to call Harold Bloom, the most important literary critic since Johnson, "dead wrong" about literature.
Or having the nerve to call the biggest literary success story a fashion-trend.
@Alex Scott
I don't see what's wrong with that.
@@mabusestestament What's wrong is that Harry Potter is amazing and he couldn't see it!
@Serban
And what is supposedly so amazing about Harry Potter that he couldn't see that makes his opinion "dead wrong"?
and she was absolutely right! good on her!
This feels like the 1980s.
I am on the side of Mr Bloom.
he is correct.
once a book is famous those critics will always gather around and put it on pedestal.
what if HP was not that famous. then no one would have said it is a good storytelling.
but good fo Ms Rowling.
Child is reading Harry Potter
Harold Bloom *snatching book out of child's hands*: How dare you read this slop! Enough I say!
Child: *starts crying*
Umbridge much? :P
That never happened. Stop strawmanning
@@sit-insforsithis1568 It's called a joke
Oh wow that's a fantastic idea
@@KingMinosxxvi No, it isn't!
"He doesnt know what he's talking about"
The NERVE on that woman to say that about Harold Bloom! wow!
Of course millions of people can be wrong. Look at McDonalds.
@@jon8004 and since he's Harold Bloom, he's right.
and millions is very small. Billions can be wrong too.
Mcdonalds provides cheap, fast, and reliable food and service. If youre staying in an unfamiliar country for business you do NOT want to play russian roulette with some hole in a wall restaurant that could potentially give you shits or taste bad or swindle you or worse. So get off your high horse lol
@@KOTEBANAROT literally any local cuisine is healthier than mcdonalds, no matter the country you're in
7:27: Bloom.
Why get emotional over what Harold says? His comments are not going to stop sales. But i'm with Harold.
I really liked this discussion. The people around the table understood what makes Harry Potter what it is.
I was a kid when these books came out. I loved them as a small child because of how visual it was and how complex and engaging the children were, though I wouldn't have said it that way at the time. It's told in clever, yet accessible language and touches a lot of mythical hallmarks. "Star Wars in book form" is a great way to summarize it, and what's wrong with Star Wars?
You enjoy slop. It's okay, most people are peasants who consume slop, but you are very much among them. :)
the fanboys
@@pygmalioninvenus6057 And you enjoy snobbery, nice!
@@serban8298 lol these guys probably dont read much themselves. Have clearly never read the books either, a lot of people just couldnt stand a single mum who did not run in 'author circles' and didnt prostrate herself to authors before her, created such a massively successful world, and only went strength to strength. Rubs them the wrong way , and all seem to be guys for some reason.
@@pygmalioninvenus6057 And you enjoy being elitist.
I honestly think it's a case of getting used to reading great literature Vs trash literature. If you spent 5 years of your life only reading the very best literature, I'm absolutely positive you'd never pick up a book like Harry Potter ever again. However, if you spent all of that 5 years reading YA, Harry Potter, Dan Brown, and the like then you'll get used to that standard of writing. It's also amazing how quickly one's level sinks to what's in front of them. I remember years ago I used to watch soap operas on TV, then I stopped watching them, and now, years later, I wouldn't go near one. They're absolute trash TV, and I can't quite believe I got hooked into watching them. I think lots of people fall into this kind of a hole, and it's so difficult to realize you're in it whilst you're in it.
I can´t really agree with this line of thought. I myself started my literary journey with Harry Potter and for years it was all I read (harry potter and similar YA books) until I got a little feed up and started moving to more classical literature and discovered the greats (Dostoievski, Garcia Marques, Steinbeck) and deeply fell in love with them as well. But I never really stoped reading this more mainstream books (I still hold HP very close to my heart) I just learned to understand the difference beetween them. While one can bring a more simplistic exploration of it´s themes and a very catarctic scpapism, the other will provide a more thougtfull and complex story. Both have their place I think, but is just my opinion.
Don't you dare compare Harry Potter with soap operas!
I disagree. I have been reading “the greatest hits” for years now and sometimes I don’t want to have to interpret every page - reread to comprehend. sometimes I just want a fun book with a great story. That’s what these books (and movies mind you) offer. They aren’t the greatest hits nor are they intellectually stimulating, but they neighbor the canon and stimulate joy. John Stuart Mill might offer some assistance here. He argues a conception of higher (fulfilling) and lower (merely satisfying) pleasures which both contribute to fulfillment. Harry Potter and perhaps other fantasy novels such as the Lord of the Rings series may be a lower pleasure and fail to fulfill my human capacity but it’s still Good and provides that happiness which good writing no matter the format brings and which still makes our leaves hold meaning. Ignorant Bliss is no sin, though I recognize it is a far cry from the mountain top of joy.
@@ordep2pucci that's exactly why Bloom is wrong. He says it does no good to read those HP books, but you read HP and other books like it until your tastes evolved and you recognized there is great literature. Bloom argued that because you read HP you will only read Stephen King and never Hemingway
Not quite, the value of a book should not be decided by compared it to others. This is not sport. Btw Dan Brown was a complete amateur, I wouldnt put him next to Rowling.
Love that Harold Bloom.
That woman talking about snobs is so true. Look at the film snobs lol
I think some commenters are not understanding what Bloom is saying when he predicts Harry Potter will be short-lived. He takes a very long-term view of these things (centuries). It's still too early to tell if his prediction is correct. The kids who grew up reading Harry Potter are probably in their thirties now. Presumably they are introducing the books to their kids, but we will have to see if the enthusiasm will be sustained across generations in perpetuity.
we forgot about many things that were very successful when they were new. few things remain after you let a century pass. I don't think HP books have entered any school curriculum so far. at least not in continental Europe. and I don't think they ever will. other authors like Carroll and Twain are instead part of schools' curricula
Did any great movie awards arise out of the HP series of movies ?
12 Oscar nominations. 0 wins. But Fantastic Beasts got an Oscar for costume design. Honestly, the movies were trash compared to the books.
We have to be grateful for those 8 movies, some of them are good, others are just OK, but at least non of them are complete trash compared to what we have nowadays. In my opinion the books are far far better but at least I can watch those movies without cringing.
@@princezzpuffypants6287 the first movie is ok and the third movie is good. the worst part of the third movie is actually the final plot device which is something taken from the book. so blame the book. but visually it was realized in an excellent way. the movies after that one were garbage instead
It’s hard to admit, but the party pooper is usually right, and Harold Bloom is absolutely right. Maslin’s anger only proves that, to me. I find it hilarious when one of them says that John Grisham writes formula and Rowling doesn’t. Rowling is all formula. The structure’s always the same, until the later books where she abandons the notion of structure entirely and just has the characters potter about (no pun intended) before a deus-ex-machina finale. It’s hard to describe what Potter ultimately is without just repeating Harold Bloom, because he’s right, it is slop and it is just cliches strung together. I tried really hard to like it as a kid because I was the exact right age for the original Potter phenomenon, and was also a voracious reader, but I just couldn’t finish any of them. I remember liking the concepts a lot - the mysterious murders in the country house that start The Goblet of Fire, for instance - but the writing was always too bland for me. It wasn’t until recently that I fully started to realise that I didn’t like the books because they’re not good books. I always thought that there was something wrong with me. But they are trash. Which is actually fine. I like trash as much as anyone, but you should know what it is and not deify its authors.
I wholeheartedly agree with this entire comment. This clip made me depressed. I couldn’t watch people of presumed repute defend HP so voraciously. Harold Bloom may not have been right about everything in his life, but he was most certainly right about this. The fact is that the HP series is agonizingly long compared to most series or pieces of literature. With the time and resources it takes a child to finish the entire Harry Potter series, they could read 10 books of higher quality which will stand the test of time. So many people these days have only read the Harry Potter series and books of similar quality when they’re young. I was unfortunately one of those children, and I’m sorry to say that I regret it. It was fun to fantasize about children with powers, but I think that’s really the only thing I can say about these books. Their only true value is as a starting point for children to learn how to sit down and go through a book, and if you’re going to teach a child that much, you might as well start with actual children’s literature.
Mark Gleason was literally hit by Joker's smile gas.
Millions of people can't be wrong.
Tik Tok has entered the chat.
Tik Tok is social media!Harry Potter is a book series!The medium is way different!The book has been translated in many languages and made countless children across the world read in a word of technological fashion that has apparently replaced reading as a hobby!
@@serban8298 one day in the future the current GenZ will look back at TikTok saying "ah, the youth of today is so ignorant and has no taste, we were much smarter and had more fun with TikTok"
This is just a phase? LMAO. 20 years after and HP is still here.
It's dying.
As George Orwell said, great works of art can be judged by how they continue to be studied and cherished long after its creation. Harry Potter has only lasted because of the pretty good movies and its influence is waning already.
Tracer it’s not. Harry Potter has been in the NYT bestselling list for a decade
It's just a phase in the same way The Hobbit is just a phase: meaning so popular years after it was created that they are teaching college courses based on the books.
@@SaintsBro217 never
i wish i could have read them before seeing any of the movies
Awesome.
sup
80 millions watched One Guy playing video game and making cringy jokes. I guess that is Art as well. And has merit somehow.
"It's not Shakespeare, it's not Whitman, it's not Carroll, therefor it's garbage." - Bloom
I mean Harry Potter isnt garbage.... but its certainly light years away from the mastery of craft displayed by any of the classics you named.
It's not even Maya Angelou LOL
@@johnmarino5378 Damn son, that one stung XD
@@sydlawson3181 That's the thing though, no one is making that claim, yet he goes on the attack.
@@habanerojones2169 hes going in on the attack because its hugely popular and praised by literally everyone as great when frankly theres better uses of your time if you genuinely want to read great literature. Harry Potter is just lower quality then the standard of literature he usually deals in and he tells it like he sees it. Hes a little arrogant but I understand his frustration.
I actually agree with Bloom on Harry Potter.
Why is the camera quality likes it’s from the 1970s lol
"Eat shit: millions of flies can't be wrong." Marcello Marchesi & His Paraphrasers.
He said Pokémon is a fad but it is the single highest grossing media franchise of all time at over $90 billion. Bigger than Star Wars, Mikey mouse, marvel, Harry Potter everything.
I am going to have to read a Harry Potter book.I am getting long in the tooth and it is on my bucket list.
Did you read one yet?
How was it
Did you read them yet?
Watching all the interviews about Harry Potter books 0:12 is great. The Reality of something that big they couldn’t even see. Janet Maslin did a great job on the positive impact of Harry Potter. I wonder what she thinks now her comment, about the movie.
It’s not a phase even 26 years later!
Why did harry potter sell so many copies? Because authors of today have put forth nothing good. There are very few fiction novels that are worth reading that have been published with in the last 50 years. Fantasy has died, the dragon has been slain. So when one okay piece of fiction comes along, people consume it, practically inhaling it. Harry Potter has nothing when compared to the old myths and fantasies, Beowulf, The Odyssey, The Iliad, Macbeth, Hamlet, Narnia, The Space Trilogy, The Lord of the Rings, and so on. The immortal authors like Virgil and Homer, Dante and Shakespeare , Poe, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, Lewis and Tolkien, and Chesterton, will live on, but Rowling will die with the passing of the age. The world is to busy to sit down and enjoy a story, thus the authors have become much to busy to write one. We need a revival of literature, A return to the old classics, and fantasies, when authors saw Dragons, and Knights in shinning armor, and princesses trapped in high towers, then we will once again have great literature.
No, we don't need a return to classics!Literature is perfectly fine as it is now and I'm 1000% sure that Rowling, King, Martin, Collins, Sapkowski, Bardugo, and many others will survive!
@@serban8298 But what of Fantasy?
"Literature is a luxury; Fiction is a necessity!"-Chesterton
Is there something bad with the old? Or rather is there something terrible with the Classics? the classical writers are like mountains, who stretch far into heaven and bring the stars down to earth.
@@nicolepresberg888 I love classics but I live the new authors too!We don't need turn the present in the past!
Literature will improve when it moves forward with the times, not when it tries to retread old ground and reinvent the wheel.
The gist of the book is about potentiallity of light (photons) and how an esoteric issue could be.
Thats schizoprenic, you should talk to someone
Havana Syndrome is a reality.
Back when people use to read books...
who else clicked hoping harold bloom would be on the panel
Boy were they wrong
Harold Bloom is awesome, however I think he's being too harsh on Harry Potter books. I read them when I was nine and I enjoyed them. Now eight years later I am still reading, but now I read intelligent literature. My favourite books are like Blood Meridian, Animal Farm, The Master and Margarita, The Rum Diary, Journey To The End of the Night, The Road, Perfume, Junky, Tales of Ordinary Madness, Catch-22, Possibility of an Island, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, A Clockwork Orange, World According to Garp, Catcher In the Rye, Franny and Zooey, Fahrenheit 451, Slaughterhouse 5, Heart of Darkness and so on... so my point being I think I got into reading, because of like Harry Potter books and Terry Pratchett's Discworld series. In conclusion reading Harry Potter when you're young is definitely not a bad thing and it's probably useful for a child.
Disappointed that animal farm isn’t on here, you definitely should read it again without the restraint of a literature class
You should find animal farm in his list, if you really read his comment
I am also very well read. I did not read Harry Potter until I was an adult. This IS great children's literature in very many ways. The character development is unparalleled in children's literature. It teaches a great many moral lessons. Symbolically it is far more rich than any other children's book. There is a lot more to analyze here than the typical children's book (to the point there are college courses dedicated to it) and that alone would make them valuable as kids books.
@@princezzpuffypants6287 C'mon. It's pop. Parade of cliches. It won't enrich little reader. But I guess by having such low general level as of now Potter does look like great literature which is a joke.
@@robertwill23 I'm sorry you are offended by good literature that happens to be popular. Not much else to say to that. Some people simply lack the intellectual ability to see something right in front of their faces because it is popular in it's time...
I'm no snob! I made it to page 3 !!! 🤔( "Green Fire", IngramSpark, geoff nelson hill, UK ) 🌈🦉
We live in the most childish culture in the history of mankind. Bloom was so very right about our culture then and he was right about where it was going..
what accent does the interviewer have?
That's a hi-class North Carolina accent
Janet Maslin is a Grade D critic.
Harold Bloom is A+++
Harry Potter isn't supposed to be a great work of literature
@@jonalderson5571 Hence I made the comment on the critic and not the book.
@@oscarless3227 I must have replied to the wrong comment sorry
Witty, ok. Ask Harold Bloom.
Mr Bloom wouldn’t agree to this shit😂😂
I know this was 2000 before the film but that woman said there's no actor you can connect with Harry Potter😂😂😂
HP is a blatant copyright violation of Jill Murphy’s 1975+ creations of the THE WORST WITCH series, so much so that it’s evident Rowling stole the idea wholesale and maliciously changed a few things to try to cover her tracks. But its SOOO obvious!
The one thing that really let's Bloom down is when he says millions of people are wrong. I adore Harry Potter but I'll admit that it's not the most impressive writing I've ever seen. As the lady said, it's snobbish. Just because you don't like something or see it as masterful art, doesn't mean it shouldn't be enjoyed or can't have huge success.
At the same time I'm disappointed with some of my fellow Potterheads. We are allowed opinions and it's not okay to attack people for them. If someone in the comments is saying the books are atrocious, don't attack them simply because you enjoy reading them.
Your words will fall on deaf ears.
and Bloom never said HP shouldn't be enjoyed or can't have huge success. he just said it's not great literature. that's not snobbish. that was just him doing his job as a literature scholar.
a lot of guts to say Harold Bloom doesn't know what he's talking about
In this case, Bloom most certainly did not know what he was talking about.
Travis7060312 Travis can you put into a single sentence what is so good about this series? How do you respond to the claim that it is cliched garbage
@@mattmarkus4868 If I could sum up what makes Harry Potter great in one scentence I would be a millionaire, not arguing with you about some pompous asshole on youtube.
@@danlyndon1905 Being able to boil down the essence of what caused the greatest selling book series of all time. And it's a good thing art is subjective or else you would be wrong.
@@danlyndon1905 Is that a statement or a question? I meant boiling it down in an artistic way. What could have turned millions of kids on to this series, holding them til the end and well beyond? What turned them on to reading and inspired them to go on to become authors themselve? No, I don't understand art. I believe no one does, least of all some arrogant contrarian who goes against the grain just to say they did.
charlie: after that what does she do?
time-traveler: she tweets about the headmaster being gay
everyone: ????
these 'critics' strike me as a bit special, particularly Mr. Prozac eyes
The only "special" one here is you!
It’s a coming of age story!
Janet Maslin has to be the shallowest of the renowned movie/literary critics. Only interested in the commercial aspect of an object. The way she clumsily attacks Bloom for dismissing Harry Potter is embarrassing.
But she is perfectly right!
@@serban8298 only she's perfectly wrong, as are millions of people
@@ahmadhasan8355 It's not wrong to like a book just because it's not great literature, just move on already.I've read plenty books, from Homer, Virgil, Greek Mythology, Dante, Shakespeare, Dostoevski, Dickens, Charlotte Bronte, Cervantes, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Kafka, Oscar Wilde, Jane Austen, Jonathan Swift, Daniel Defoe, Milton and so on.Guess what, Harry Potter and fantasy books in general are still fine for entertainment.So are Stephen King books.Because that's what they are, entertainment.So for you to come here and say "They're not serious literature" just makes no sense.No, they're not great literature.Nobody reads them as if they are and the authors didn't intend to write something astonishing in the strict literary sense!
Watching it in 2022. The dude could’ve been more wrong calling it just a fashion thing.
Different strokes for different folks.
Different folks stroke to different tales, folks!
Harold Bloom is right. It’s like the MCU, it’s designed to appeal to the masses and for people who like simplistic things that aren’t nuanced. I’m 16 and I read it as a 5,7 and 10 years and around the time I read Shakespeare and later Dostoyevsky. Harry Potter also carried every trope ever and lacks the most basic originality.
uh… from what I can tell you have a horcrux in your username (perhaps the Bulgarian/Cyrillic writing system or something)
Harry Potter is far better than MCU though!
I dont think 20 years from now they gonna celebrate the MCU. It was entertaining but there're no value that make it stay with the people.
@@nga88nguyen that’s just you though.
I love Harry Potter, but you can’t deny the MCU is a big franchise, and an equally big fandom. Your just like the people in the video saying that Harry Potter will just be a “phase.”But thats just wrong.
Omg a pseudointellectual teen, how original
Compare the 'famous quotes' from Harry Potter books with quotes from Shakespeare..... Harry Potter quotes are almost laughably sophomoric.
Tell me meaningful HP quote that's "almost laughably sophomoric".
@@serban8298 'meaningful' HP quotes don't roll off the tongue like the classic quotable quotes, be it Shakespeare, Hemingway, Dickens, etc. Yes they may be meaningful but not catchy nor memorable.
Well, no one put HP next to Shakespeare, are you trying to put Shakespeare down?
So what. I admire the art of Shakespeare but personally find myself bored by a lot of his writings. The man was a genius and many great movies and modern stage performances have come from his writings.
However, that's not the only important part of writing or any other form of art. I love Harry Potter because it's engaging, easy to connect with and fun. J.K Rowling is 20,000 leagues below Shakespeare in terms of her writing ability but I enjoy her work more.
This is why people having jobs that solely involve their opinion has always been strange to me. Bloom may be correct in some of his assessments but he comes across as an ugly gatekeeper here
Books and film are subjective. They always will be. I read books and watch film to be entertained. Nothing else. I read and listen to criticism for the same reason. I am certainly interested in the production of film and structuring of novels, but they will never sway me when it comes to my interest. Thrill me... make me happy....make me sad.... that is why I indulge in these mediums....
They are not. Otherwise, why critics review them? For what? For clicks? Art cannot b subjective because then anything goes is Art and then Art is meaningless. And then cat video or throwing up dude on RUclips with 80 million views is Art. LOL. Art has criteria according to which it is judged.
@@robertwill23 art is subjective in that people can have different responses to the same piece of art but high art does exist
Probably we could find 35 million people who think Paul McCartney is a better composer than was Mozart. Could they be wrong? You bet they could.
But no one has said that Harry Potter is better than Don Quixote, The Lord of the Rings, etc... millions of people think that Harry is a great novel, just as many think that McCartney is a great musician. In none of those cases do I think people are wrong.
@@surenoespacial4936 Millions (billions?) of people drink fizzy sugary soda drinks which are clearly detrimental to their health. Lots of people still smoke cigarettes, amazingly. Things are not good just because lots of people like them, are they?
@andyhurrell you are not defining "Good". I would argue that millions of people drink soda because it is "good", if it wasn't good, then people wouldn't drink it. Same goes for smoking - it's good otherwise people wouldn't do it. Going back to Mozart vs McCartney...again, you need to define "better". Do you mean better on a technical level or on a popularity level? McCartney couldn't even read music so clearly he wouldn't be winning any competition against Mozart in that respect. But there isn't a person on the planet who doesn't know at least 1 beatles song. McCartney influenced virtually every popular musician of the last 60 years. You can't talk about music without mentioning the Beatles. So it depends on what you mean by "better". Given the choice to listen to Mozart or the Beatles, I would choose the Beatles every day of the week. So yeah, to me McCartney is an infinitely better composer than Mozart.
For the record, I would rate John Williams a better composer than Mozart, but then again I put a lot of weight in melody. I suppose it all depends on how you define "better".
@@mikesmithz So, according to your definition of ‘good’, approximately how many people would need to be actively and enthusiastically involved in assaulting and robbing elderly people for this practise to be considered good?
haha everyone is wrong he is right,that guy is funny
+Milo O' Rourke there is nothing in what HB said that is pretentious. Perhaps you should grab a dictionary and take a breath.
This is terrific. It's a wonderful introduction to the Harry Potter books.
(Janet Maslin is exactly right about Harold Bloom's petty snobbery). I'm really impressed that on the release of the 4th Harry Potter book they've predicted the harm of marketing spin off toys--that's exactly what happened. When kids (and their parents helping) make their own Harry and friends wizard stuff it's all good, when they buy pre-made stuff it spoils the fun and not a little. The bit about Filch is insightful. I remember being under five years old watching and absorbing everything I saw on Rocky & Bullwinkle and then spending the next 20 years getting the 'jokes' as I learned more and more and gained experience.
"There's no actor you can connect to Harry Potter"
"Boy, there will be." (Fortunately Daniel Radcliffe did a good job and seems to be a bit odd with a wry sense of humor).
Maslin saying that the movie series isn't a slam dunk is also right on. It would've been very easy to screw up.
Take a look at Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. It's a weird book, and the two movies made of it were smart enough to also be weird in their own way.
Shorty took an L on that movie prediction...
not at all, she was the one abolsutely spot on through the whole thing. She was wrong in the sense in the movies were a commercial success, but she already said that before anyone, but absolutely right that most agree they dont come close to capturing the magic of the books.
I agree with Bloom. They’re entertaining, and witty, and the syntax is pure and tight. But they are not thematically rich or stylistic gems.
Age 18-30. The age when person is so miserable in this world and so almost everyone imagine a different world. Try to escape the reality. And Harry Potter gives that. End of story.
The ones who promote avoiding responsibility and facing the truth via childish escapism are worse than those blissfully unaware they'd never grown up.
@ Shut your mouth!Escapism is amazing and so is Harry Potter!
is that the target of HP? I thought it was way younger than that. I really don't see how childish stories could appeal to full grown adults in their 20s. at that age you should be into stories full of violence, rebelliousness, lust, etc.
They discredit and shame Bloom - but his main argument; "Its the current thing that everyone wants because others have it" - is something they themselves used as reasons for why its so popular. And it really is just that. Three adults fooled, they don't argue literary weight or merit - its just vagueries about how she's "witty and interesting" or how the story is great because everyone wants it.
Bloom actually argues a point.
Yes. Everyone was fooled.
Right... it's just a fad. I give it a year, max.
@@llanitedave twisting the argument to be petulant xD thats not what I said. U know it. Yet this is what the fandom does.
Engage with the argument or dont waste my time
There is no actor that you can connect with Harry Potter. Oh wow!
Compare the opinions of the book peddlers to the opinion of Harold Bloom, the Yale English professor who Rose had on his show a number of times. Total opposites. Bloom thought the novels complete trash and said even as far as children's literature went they were terrible.
Sad state of mainstream criticism on display. Bloom points to the truth and all three "important" critics at "important" papers almost choked on their outrage. Harry Potter is parade of cliche, escapist low-brow pop book if we evaluate it according to aesthetic criteria or in terms of artistic merit. Those outraged critics' job is to make everyday critical judgements of taste about culture, to differentiate between low and high, to define bad and good. At least try to. Otherwise, why are you a critic at "important" paper? They admitted that Potter isn't literary fiction but happy to avoid criticizing its actual qualities and focus on "80 millions sold" aspect to sell their own papers. Fact that we're still aware of Rowling's existence (prob because of Hollywood movies that were made in the right time to secure her in pop culture and actually many pop stars and celebs are known for many years now) doesnt make her book series the work of great literature. She's not gonna be classic.
She is gonna be a classic, for sure!
She will be a classic because of the people in their 40s who are adamant that it is quality prose. Parents choose names from these books for crying out loud!
Hollywood also was at the right time for Hemingway, a mediocre author that Bloom thought was "classic".
Faulkner was right when he called him "simple"
Just saying. I would rather talk with Harold Bloom than Janet Maslin.
Most importantly, Rowling, maybe without even realizing it, tapped into the archetypal structure of Western mythology and literature and art. She incorporates all of the history of Western myth into her fiction. Its truly amazing, especially if you see how much she did unconsciously.
I literally believe great art and myth exist on their own. We discover these things, the artist channels the Muse.
She even says that the character appeared to her fully formed, she just had to write it down. The art finds us by way of falling into place.
A lot of vapid talk. What examples are there beyond the monster in the 2nd book being a dog with three heads
@@HoiSourced
nicholas flamel
mandrakes
grindylows
boggarts
veelas (nyphs maybe)
phoenixes
centaurs
house elves
etc. etc.
(the monster in 2nd book is a basilisk and the dog is in the 1st book)
in my opinion these myths were included on purpose
The snobbery of this thread is astounding. These books have gotten more people into reading than any of the "masters" other people are mentioning. Everyone has to start some where
If you start with junk food will it lead you to eat actual food? That all depends.
@@quaid667 From Harry Potter i started reading literature from qll times!So, your analogy is crap!
@@serban8298 don't get emotional over a franchise that has boomed to the point that there are stores and theme rides of Harry Potter. Crap or not, everyone is aware of it's existence.
@@serban8298 Saying you went from Harry Potter to Shakespeare is like saying you went from a bag of chips to nouvelle cuisine. The connection just isn't there.
@@hakmagui9842 Well, I have.I'm also a literary scholar.I'm a first year student at the Faculty of Letters and ever since I started reading books about 5 years ago, I read all kinds of books.Yes, Harry Potter isn't a deep work with complex, conflictual characters like something written by Shakespeare or Tolstoi or Dostoevski or Homer, but it's an enjoyable, thrilling story with some morals along the way.Not liking it is fine, but you shouldn't just belittle others for choosing to read books like this.J.K. Rowling is no Shakespeare, but she's no Colleen Hoover either.
Bloom just could not accept that Rowling got children and a lot of adults to actually read, and enjoy it.
While he is only a litterary snob proclaiming himself to be a critic of the creative works of others.
Harold Bloom is a Genius and has written more books than you could read in a year. But hey he's just a literary snob..you are a dingo
@@KingMinosxxvi
Harold Bloom has written a total of ONE (1) book of fiction himself. And even that one was based on the work of someone else (David Lindsay), so could be seen as nothing more than fan-fiction.
He was an over-hyped critic of other peoples creativity, which he lacked himself, and had countless affaires with his female University students (bragging about it even), and also was indeed a literary snob and dinosaur.
And fyi: I read 1 or 2 books a week, fiction, non-fiction and scientific works, and have done since I was 5 yo.
@@Keyboardje He is a literary critic. If you do not think literary criticism is valuable or creative work you can take it up with Oscar Wilde. I am quite sure that he knows a great deal more about literature than you do about literary criticism. And you are a deeply ignorant person.
@@KingMinosxxvi
And you sound like a fan-girl.
He's dead by the way, so it's "he WAS".
@@Keyboardje Do you enjoy being an unsubstantiated pendant? Seriously you are going to quibble about tense when you are talking about a man who's work you probably have not read a drop of.
Rowling's books are almost for adults, but not quite; unlike other famous fantasy fiction.
Sorry, I tried them.
The look like cult members of the moonies (don't they)
Pokemon really faded away...
No it did not...
@@stressedoutofexistence663 sarcasm
“That’s just reflexive snobbery”. She is my hero 😊
Yeah, the films won't be nearly as great as the books... Yeah okay
Danny E haha I couldn’t finish the movies because they were so bad compared to the books, but she was dead wrong about them not being successful!
The third film is a masterpiece
Compared to the books, the movies are shite, but they have been extremely successful... (and not to start an argument, but the 3rd film was my least favorite adaptation... NONE of the symbolism from the book was translated sufficiently to film.)
3 5 7 and 8 are good tho
Yeah they were even more shit
Surprising that they could outdo those mediocre books in that regard
These critics are pretty shameful. Absolutely pathetic.
i read 2 chapters of a harry potter book, but i was in my late 20s at the time... anyhow, i thought it was shite.. probably doesn't help that i read "the magician" by raymond feist a few weeks before it
Bloom's right. He always was.
Even when he hated T.S. Eliot and didn't think him worthy to be included in his Western Canon? just asking your opinion.
*I agree in this regard fully.
@@ahmadhasan8355 Yes.
@@coolshah1662 very well, thank you
Why is Dolores Umbridge defending Harry Potter??
Loool Harold Bloom was so obviously wrong and has been proven so, and all the snobs in the comment section who havent even read the HP books trying to cling onto his dismissive elitist attitude and ignoring the genuinely interesting convo going on around the table
technically they're made for "young adults" and if we're being really frank about this there are plenty of books with infinity more depth, wit and wisdom contained within them directed at that age group.
Everyone else on the panel was unwilling to point out the books shortcomings and was pure peaches and cream about it. They didnt feel even remotely critical which is what I expect from any critic of the art, especially when the work being talked about has such obvious short comings.
They were sugar coating it and it felt disingenuous. It feels like they're dancing around all the tropes and lazy writing only to exalt what little bit those books had to offer as if it were the new Alice in Wonderland.
Spineless critics dont make history.
way well said. what i got fom harold bloom is that he says the hp books lead nowhere. in my experience the now grown up hp readers dont read, and haven't read, anything.
@@richardravenclaw318 then our experience is one and the same lmao
Alice in Wonderland isn't actually good children's literature!C.S. Lewis said that children's literature which can only be enjoyed by children is not good children's literature!This means that when you reread your childhood books out of nostalgy, you should find hidden meanings that you couldn't see as a child!That wasn't the case here!Alice in Wonderland was my favourite story as a child but I reread it in the first year of highschool and I was like "Damn, did I take this shit seriously?" .Harry Potter is by all means superior to Lewis' crap!No, I haven't read it as a child, I read it in my teens but I'm convinced that every fan would agree that Harry Potter has many things a child is unable to understand, same with The Lord of The Rings and many others!Once and for all, accept that you are dead wrong just like your critic with outdated beliefs!
@@serban8298 Alice I'm wonderland at least flirts with real originality.
Hairy Potter is literally just a show real of all the laziest platitudes already laid down in better books.
Tho I will agree the writing itself pretty overhyped it was really more the world and illustration lol
@@dardmul the animation is illegal, otherwise 10/9; would toung kiss
Completely lacker foresight with the acting comment
Happy New Year to everyone in advance except from those who say fantasy and sci-fi aren't real literature!JERKS!
They can be, Harry Potter isn't though...
@@grrggrrg4805 Yes, it is, JERK!
No one is right.
Bloom is wrong to say that they are not reading.
But harry potter isn't great literature also.
I think it's good for children, but it is not really adult fiction.
Harold Bloom reminds me of the pretentious English teacher in 'Finding Forrester'.
In Out, And what do you think Bloom is pretending to be?
People like Harold Bloom are the reason I loved english, poetry, and reading until we had to start reading classic literature in English class. It’s outdated, unbelievably boring, and not at all relatable. What I learned from classic literature is that it’s depressing and apathetic. What I learned from classic literature is that adults like to give kids tedious, boring books that are creatively challenged and have secret adult messages in them that, as a child, are totally unrelatable, and so obscure that half the time you think they’re just reading into things too much. Like so many people I know, I didn’t read for most of my adult life, because that’s how unappealing English was as a kid. If you want to be a book snob, that’s fine. Teach a college lit class. But don’t ruin reading for kids just because you’re worried that the future generation won’t carry on your perspective of what good fiction is or is not. Grade school should be about learning to enjoy reading, not about learning to be cultured in the adult world.
Alika Kianga I actually agree with much of what you said though I still maintain the assertion that classic literature is profoundly important for grasping the English language. However, what you said about kids reading this stuff is absolutely correct- they shouldn’t have the love of reading be snuffed out of them by enforcing that.
@@usayeed727 See, here's the thing though, I was amazing at English in gradeschool and I placed very highly on our state exams, but I never read any of the books I was assigned. I got really good at language because when I was a kid I spent a lot of time on the internet, and I found people to "roleplay" with (not in a sexual sense) on a website called "neopets" where you could have a virtual pet. I learned how to type incredibly fast, I spent hours writing and looking up synonyms and new words to use (and correcting my spelling), and I learned how to write and plan interesting stories that held my audience's attention. When I was in 5th grade, I wrote a 40-page book. Yet I hated English class.
The reason is very simple. My childhood self just wasn't interested in the same things adults feel should be interesting. I wanted colors, magic, wonder, and I wanted creative fantasies to fill my head with. Adults seem to have no idea just how boring their world is.
Think of it this way. I'm sure that you're aware that little children pretend play. You know, we like to pretend that we're pirates or heros saving our friends. As we grow older, we feel driven to "put aside childish things" and outgrow that creativity. However, it isn't under kids are in highschool that they genuinely feel disinterested in entertainment that seems "unrealistic". As humans, we just don't have enough experience yet at the age of 12 to feel that dissonance that detaches us from the story.
Studies in game theory show that people of all ages learn much more effectively when playing a game. Games are much more exciting and stimulating. That is what children need from books. In fact, one aspect of interest in which books outshine games, and even and movies is that they can take the mind to places you never would have imagined. There's no better time to experience that then when you haven't yet lost your childhood appreciation for fantastical things. If you've been to a carnival as a child, you might remember the feeling. Your heart is racing, you're so excited you feel as though electricity is pulsing through your body and you want to run at top speed....Kids can feel the same adrenaline rush for an insanely exciting climax in a story. As with Harry Potter, where Harry faces Voldemort at the end of the first book. Next to that, hearing about a typical boy come of age and having his dog die is not only depressing but incredibly dry.
Which story do you think is more likely to cause a child to want to write their own stories for hours on end? That's what schools should teach - a love of reading. The classics aren't going anywhere - they'll still be there when you're in college, but you will understand them better. However, you only get to see a fantastical tale through the eyes of a child, when you're a child.
seriously! That old man can has forgotten what its like to be a child. Most kids dont remember what we were forced to read in school bc they werent interesting. We dont hold those books in high regard. We may know they have prestige but doesnt mean they're prestigious to us. However we do remember Harry potter. Im not a big harry potter fan, but i did love them as a kid. i saved money and begged my mom for them. My mom also read them lol
I think its more important to make reading appealing by giving children books they can understand and relate too. Books that arent "boring" to a child. Books from decades and centuries ago, dont do that. Even with good intentions, adults still dont understand "the classics" arent turning kids into readers, they arent even remembered and they are more of deterrence to continue reading for most. Theyre boring to the majority of kids and adults. Hes very elitist about literature in general.
@@johnnypoo16and yet he throws out examples of children’s literature that would be far more enriching than something limited like Harry Potter. You might not agree with his harshness in tone - God forbid he be passionate about his life’s work, but in essence he’s 100% right in how he describes such commercial crowd pleasing cliches not deepening someone’s experience or challenging their morality or intelligence in the long run. He is stressing the importance of enhancing language and true learning: engaging and attempting to understand work that is vital to actually growing as a person. You can understand and appreciate what it’s like to be a child while not refusing to face reality and confront actual problems that matter in the world around you.
Who are these Muppets? Harold Bloom is a giant.
"THESE", I assume you meant?
But it's all too clear that *he* is the ludicrous muppet here. And a giant yes, but a giant biased snob of a stupid and jelous old fart too, who has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. Illustrated and proven by the fact that we are all here talking and writing about Harry Potter 20 years later, and Rowling has become a multi-millionaire from writing. The first ever.
Harold Bloom is the muppet here!
@@serban8298 says the first year "literary scholar"
harry potter is big ok.....but it doesnt come close to the absolute greatness of pokemon.
but the question never was what story has the biggest universe, but the what story has the best universe, so Harry Potter is excelent and more complex
i love Howard Bloom. Look at how offended they all are haha. they know hes right
Typo. My bad. (Dont actually like howard bloom)
I do. It sort of reminds me of how Stephen King said that he thinks the reason that he now gets a better critical response is because all the old people that hated him when he first came along on the literary scene died out. ha ha
Mark Gunnells im no fan of such authors and i regret their 'legitimisation' but Howard tended to criticize from a semi- moralistic point of view that i dont really get. Harold advocated substance in a more poetic, almost spiritual way which i personally appreciate more
Mark Gunnells which youd still be hard pressed to find in King or Rowling
Again, I can respect an alternate opinion but I disagree. I think King and Rowling are full of substance, substance that gets overlooked because of their popularity. They are talking about huge issues in a way that is accessible to many. You don't have to agree, I'm not trying to convince you, just saying that it is in fact very subjective and people find different things in art. Where you see throw-away entertainment, I see substance.
I agree with Prof. Bloom.
I would rather read Shakespeare than Harry Potter.
You can read and enjoy both.
@@BloggerMusicMan
I do read both, and many many others.
And I have to say that there has never been a book (or books) in all my 59 years that captivated me more than the Harry Potter books.
What Bloom and other literary snobs don't understand is that it's not about how many difficult words are used in order to try and show how "well read and intelligent" you pretend to be, it's about how a story can grab you by the heart, throat and soul and never let go!
@@Keyboardje Yes Harry Potter books grab you by the heart and throat in the moment whereas Shakespeare deepens and enriches your soul for a lifetime.
@@papagen00 Harry Potter enriches you too!Also, why do you all always use Shakespeare as an example?He was a great playwright, but there are better writers than him(Dickens, Dostoievski, Tolstoi, Dante, etc.).
@@serban8298 Even those on the panel agreed HP is not 'high literature'. It's just pulp fiction fit for popular consumption and there's nothing wrong with that, if you take it for what it is.