[Tom4784]

Rowling criticised over 'Potter' success
Sunday, March 14 2010, 03:04 GMT

By Aaron Broverman, US Entertainment Reporter


Rex Features
J.K. Rowling has been criticised over her success by a blogger at The Daily Telegraph.

According to PopStar, Toby Young asserted that the author's books are second-rate and that she doesn't deserve to be a billionaire as a consequence.

"A thoroughly undeserved honour," he claimed, before going on to attest that the series is a "bland amalgam of far more interesting work by far more imaginative writers" and that "the plots are feeble and episodic".

He did give the novelist some credit, but said that what little merit there was dried up due to "endless repetition".

Young is an author in his own right; his book is called How to Lose Friends and Alienate People.

A case of the green eyes if I've ever seen it, that or someone's desperate for publicity.

[GypsyGoth]

The way his book get mentioned at the end of it.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

A case of the green eyes if I've ever seen it, that or someone's desperate for publicity.

Yeah the Tobester as he was known at Cambridge is a bit of an errrse

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by GypsyGoth

The way his book get mentioned at the end of it.

Yeah it made me chortle.

Originally Posted by Shasown

Yeah the Tobester as he was known at Cambridge is a bit of an errrse

He sounds like one.

[bansheewails]

Very few books can claim to be orginal, even Lord of the Rings is based loosely on Arthur and the Knights of the round table. What JK should be given vast amounts of credit for is writing a series of novels that children want to read. Creating readers, that is what she should be proud of.

[Stu]

Your about four or five years late to the party, Toby. Now sod off, you supremist twat.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by bansheewails

Very few books can claim to be orginal, even Lord of the Rings is based loosely on Arthur and the Knights of the round table. What JK should be given vast amounts of credit for is writing a series of novels that children want to read. Creating readers, that is what she should be proud of.

Originally Posted by Judas Iscariot

Your about four or five years late to the party, Toby. Now sod off, you supremist twat.

I agree with both completely.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by bansheewails

Very few books can claim to be orginal, even Lord of the Rings is based loosely on Arthur and the Knights of the round table. What JK should be given vast amounts of credit for is writing a series of novels that children want to read. Creating readers, that is what she should be proud of.

Yep, agreed. She may not have written masterpieces of literature, but she's a very clever writer who has evolved with her readers. They'll be timeless in that sense, with younger children starting with the first novel and growing up with them, as each book gets bigger and more sophisticated. That was a very intelligent thing to do on her part.

And that lad is a prat of the highest order. Well known for being a bit of a douche.

[bansheewails]

And any way I enjoyed harry potter, reading them myself and to my kids, they have moved on to other stories but are still reading, which is great!! Harry Potter is a universal tale of good versus evil, and escapism, and any thing that this pope says is bad, is good on my book!!!! lol