Are the Harry Potter books great literature, or just 7 long books? Or are they somewhere in between?
If you ask the people who decide what “great literature” is (the academics, the critics, the “intellectuals”) then they’ll say that they definitely are *not* great literature. However, if you ask them in 100 years time they’ll probably have changed their mind. (I’ve read none of them… so I can’t say myself).
My idea of great literature is a book that I want to read over and over again. That is what I found the in the Harry Potter books. I didn’t even hear about them until after the fourth book had been released. For the first time through, I borrowed them from a roommate. After having read his copies, I decided that I had to have my own. So, I went out to the bookstore and bought all four of them in hardcover. (I wanted the books to last.) I have since bought all of the other books as they were released in hardcover and I have obtained electronic copies of them. I have read each of the books several times and have enjoyed them each time. Personally, I place them up there with the Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of Narnia on my all time favorite list.
Between Harry Potter and Twilight I have seen too many blogs arguing over whether each series is great literature or not. What I have not seen is any so bold as to state what defines something as great literature. One of the reasons Shakespeare is so hard to study is that it is practically written in a foreign language given the differences in the English language over time. Planet of the Apes is on the classic literature list in high schools, JKR’s is clearly superior in its flow and wit and characterizations, how can her books not be considered great literature. Someone please define great literature for me.
