Harry Potter Doomed to be a Classic?

Written by Lucia M

When walking the aisles of the basement of the library I look upon tombs of such great authors as Jonathon Swift, Sir Thomas Moore, and William Shakespeare. Some of these books seem ancient with handwritten dates on the title page with numbers like 1938. This, for me, brings up the inevitable question: What is classic literature? Is it anything that you or I could write? Are any recently published books doomed to become classics? Are cultural phenomena such as Harry Potter destined to live dusty lives on library bookshelves? While it is true that classics have been reprinted in many forms, the books themselves have not been the most popular in recent years. It is hard to find out if classics were popular in their heyday; however, one can look at the popularity of a recent book and compare it to other books that are considered classics. The popularity of the Harry Potter books is greater than anyone could ever expect, however, this does not necessarily mean that the books will become a classic.

When asked if Harry Potter could become the next classic, one aging mathematician simply states, “I hope not” (Jarvinen). Though he is not a cultural or literary genius, this man’s sentiments are echoed by many. With the popularity of the Harry Potter books, the style of the author, Joanne K Rowling, has come under much criticism. In his critical article for the Spectator, Philip Hensher writes, “Rowling is not a subtle writer… how routinely [she] resorts to turning up the volume rather than describing anything vividly.” Hensher then goes on to elaborate by rewording one of Rowling’s sentences to express her same sentiments with a much more sophisticated tone; however, he ends up using nine more lines of type. Hensher’s interpretation of Rowling’s words would further Rowling’s books along the path to being classics, had Rowling only chosen a more mature style of writing.

Preceding discussion of Rowling’s writing style one should discuss what classical literature is. Mark Twain defines classical literature as “…something that everybody wants to have read, but nobody wants to read” (Flesch 40). Reasons people do not want to read these books will vary from the topic of the book or the language the author used to being forced by a class to read them or society growing away from literature and into technology. Regardless of reasons to read a classic or not the universal definition of a classic includes the piece transcending time and bringing discussion to the table even a century after the author has passed on. A classic must also entertain, even if entertaining means that teachers are entertained at watching their students force themselves to read content seen as dry. When deciding what makes a classic one must also look at how a book relates to society. Will the book be able to give the current/future generations something new to ponder?

To transcend time means that a piece has been around for many years. “You don’t see new classics being made. Nor do you see new antiques, freshly made” (SysMan), writes one collegiate student. This student does speak truth; it takes decades to declare something antique, and most (if not all) classical literature was written at least a century ago. However, in a segment of the NPR radio show Talk of the Nation called “In Literature, What Makes a Classic?” guest Joan Didion discusses the Everyman’s Library, a series of reprinted classics that make older books available to every man. “The other thing about Everyman’s Library is basically it seems to me that the most of the books in it have crossed two generations,” she says. Two generations is not a century, which opens up the idea that a classic could be written today.

Moving back to Harry Potter… What about these books makes one want to read them? No one can dispute that Rowling’s stories most certainly entertain, but will her stories transcend time? One literature major from Scotland comments that the Harry Potter books “are gripping yarns, but they lack technical excellence and […] Rowling seems to engage with her audience on anything other than an intellectual level” (Wilson). If a piece of classic literature brings discussion to the table that transcends time, can Rowling’s work bring discussion to the table that is not criticism? In his book analyzing the popularity of Harry Potter, Andrew Blake writes that “the cheap answer is that all this is down to hype” (3). Someone read the books, liked them and passed them onto his/her friends. The friends passed them onto their friends and suddenly the books are popular enough to think about making a movie out of. Once there is a movie, the press goes in and more people want to read the books. How come this same idea didn’t happen to movies such as Hairspray, Memoirs of a Geisha and Running with Scissors? Another simple answer about Harry Potter comes from a Canadian mother of two: “the Harry Potter books are a ‘fad’… [people] read them for the same reason people wore neon tights in the 80’s – because everyone else is doing it” (Sylvin). Call it hype or a fad; people have been reading the Harry Potter books mostly because they have heard about them through word of mouth. With the onset of the converting the books into movies there has been more hype in the form advertisements. If this is true, and the popularity of the books is summed up to being a fad, then as soon as the last book is converted into a movie the popularity of the books will die down and the books will die off into obscurity and they will be saved from a life on the dusty, forgotten bookshelves of a college library. Concluding that, if Rowling’s work is destined to fall into obscurity then it will not matter what kind of discussion that the books bring.

Before Harry Potter can be dismissed as a fad, one has to ask how else the books compare to traditional classics. Author Dan Furman states that “…classics have to be considered relative to their time period.” Is Harry Potter relevant to this modern era? Time will most certainly tell us, but how can we know now? One idea may be that Rowling gives her main character qualities that mirror emotions that a reader may be feeling. In a book review on Amazon.com, self described writer and editor Victoria Tarrani writes that Harry “was different from his peer group; isolated in a world of Muggles. Children often feel isolated and mistreated, as do adults, therefore most people can relate to this situation.” Feeling alone may not be directly relevant to the era; however, it helps Rowling connect to her audience so that her creative storytelling is not her only connection to her millions of readers. In an age of growing technology many people become cut off from human interaction. When someone takes a step back from their technological pursuits he/she may feel alone or isolated from everyone else. This connecting emotion may be the single defining topic that determines Harry Potter’s place in literary history.

In a 2001 article listing reprinted children’s classics the Harry Potter series is listed along with L. Frank Baum’s The Wizard of Oz and J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit (Merina). The Wizard of Oz is a loveable story that many remember from childhood in the form of a bright colorful movie starring Judy Garland. The Hobbit, however, is not as easy of a read and though there have been several film adaptations, the book does not seem one to easily capture a child’s attention.

Both The Wizard of Oz and The Hobbit weave strong stories that do weave wonders that dazzle a child’s imagination. Does Harry Potter measure up to the comparison? Just as Baum and Tolkien do, Rowling sets her stories in a fanciful world where only she knows the limits. As one English graduate student puts it,

Fantasy books are rarely considered classics […] they’re very self-referential, and that makes it hard for them to be socially relevant […] people often state that classics are timeless, but a majority of the time the books quickest to become classics are the ones that most closely reflect the author’s relevant events or philosophies. That’s not to say that fantasies can’t become classics… (St. Pierre).

The three books in question right now are all considered fantasies. The three books have also all been converted into movies. Why are the Wizard of Oz and The Hobbit easily considered classics while Harry Potter is still being debated? The answer is time. Both The Wizard of Oz and The Hobbit were written before the onset of World War II, they both have been around for more than 70 years. The Harry Potter series was only completed a few short months ago. Any chance Harry Potter has becoming a classic will only be proven with time.

Harry Potter is a cultural phenomenon; no one can deny that. In an age where society has turned towards television, the internet and other technology Rowling has succeed in giving a younger generation a reason to read books. With the film adaptations Rowling’s work can be seen nearly everywhere. As each successive book has been written Rowling draws more of an audience, even if many are only reading the books to find out what all the hype is about. Many have concluded that the hype is not worth it, while others have deemed Rowling’s books the next great classics. Though Rowling has achieved something that once may have been considered impossible, her work is not destined to last forever, at least in the sense of becoming classics.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/hide comments

Show/hide comment form

Name

Email

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment Preview