While reading a review of “1001 Books To Read Before You Die” I noticed that the reviewer questioned the absence of any books which have been hugely popular recently- Harry Potter being one example. While I agree that the author seemed to hold a grudge against popular literature, I also question the value of many books with huge fan followings. I mean, Harry Potter was alright and a few years from now I’ll probably be able to say the same about Twilight, although I’m currently to hot and bothered over the popularity they’ve gained to give them their due.
So why are they #1 best sellers and all that jazz? Here’s what I replied to the post with:
While I agree to some extent with your notion that what is popular among most people has merit, I probably land a little closer to the author in the agree/disagree spectrum (once things were simple; black and white, you either agreed or disagreed with a statement- then they invented grayscale).
My theory about popular books such as Harry Potter or Twilight is that their wide appeal adds a multiplying (or perhaps exponential) factor. If everyone lived in an isolated bubble with no contact between themselves and other readers, the majority would like these books, and a select few might love them. But start connecting the dots (bubbles) and you see each individual’s reaction increase as they discover they are not alone. This is the phenomenon which causes huge segments of the population to wish they had glittery boyfriends or Golden Snitch keychains.
Yet despite mass appeal, it is quite possible for such books to not be incredibly good. Let’s visit bubble world again and use that sample pool to create a graph in two variables. On the X-axis we have the people who read a book. Not the number of people, mind you, but the people. On the Y-axis we have how much each one liked it. For the sake of organization we’ll put all the people who liked the book the most closest to the Y-axis itself (working only in the 1st quadrant). Thus for a book such as Harry Potter which has a wide fan base we will see, well, what looks like a low, squat building stretching almost all the way across the graph with a smoke stack or two on the leftmost side. Now, take a niche book, or a classic such as Moby Dick. You’ll find yourself with a skyscraper on the Y-axis with a sudden drop off which goes below the height of Harry Potter’s low, squat building.
Then of course there is the out of bubble world graph of a book like Harry Potter’s popularity.
Now, because I don’t want to get into negative ratings, assume that anything over fifteen means that they like the book, are willing to buy the book, maybe tell their friends about it, etc. All those things that make a book sell. Even if Moby Dick has a few people who are far more wildly enthused over it than anyone is over Harry Potter (in bubble world), it doesn’t matter because Harry Potter has, over all, more people who are above that magical threshold of fifteen. Now transfer into the real world.
Harry Potter has sold enough copies to make it a bestseller, and everyone knows it. Magical Multiplier Effect (TM) occurs and makes everyone adore it. By no means is it a bad book, but it’s not really excellent either. Just broad.
Harry Potter, Twilight, and Moby Dick are all just examples representing certain types of book. When possible, please believe that commentary is about the class of book, not specific books.
Also, a few notes on the graphs. They do not reflect any real data. At all. They may be violently misleading. I can only hope that they will mislead you in the right direction.
Now just to convince WordPress to add 3000 to my word count for the pictures.