Subscribe
This is the first time I’ve heard of this; then again, I don’t pay much attention to the New York Times bestsellers list.
With the release of Deathy Hallows in July, we will not see Rowling’s final book, already setting records for its initial print run, topping the New York Times best seller list. Why is that? The UK has adult and children’s covers. Across the pond they recognize that adults read Harry Potter.
In 2000, The New York Times created a children’s best seller list because of publisher’s complaints that Rowling’s books dominated the top spots and deprived the public of other books. More importantly, with the creation of the children’s list they were once again able to slap the ”NY Times Best Seller” sticker on the front of more of their own books once again.
What does that sticker get them?
The New York Times list is the most prestigious of all of the lists that rank book sales. So much so, that publishers often pay authors a bonus for landing on this list. To publishers it means prime location in bookstores, big box stores, and chain stores and is arguably the most effective form of publicity out there. For those that earn money by selling books I imagine it must be hard to see one author’s name in the top spots, and even harder when that book is marketed to children.
So in the new millennium, the New York Times succumbed to industry pressure. It doesn’t matter to the New York Times that 35% of Potter books are purchased by adults for adults. Isn’t the list supposed to reflect what the buying public is reading at the time? Isn’t 12 million an adult enough number?
If Dan Brown had two or three books on the New York Times list at once, or if Stephen King had a few hovering in the top ten, should there be a mystery list or a list just for horror books because one genre of books is dominating the coveted New York Times spots?
By creating a separate list did the New York Times say that children’s literature less important than adult literature?
I guess that there is a positive side to the creation of a children’s list. A New York Times kid’s list brings more attention to books and authors that would go otherwise unnoticed. As a parent, I read the list and have made purchases for my children based on the children’s list.
However, I firmly believe that if you want to get on the New York Times best seller list you should write a better book than JK Rowling not create a separate list because you cannot compete with her books.
I am reminded of the words of Tom Riddle from the movie Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets:
“Funny the damage that a silly little book can do…”
It’s all clever marketing again.. adults looking for her new book are going to wonder why it is NOT on the best seller list in the NY times and raise questions which will be published in articles and magazines across the country as well as some, no doubt, searching questions on local television about some of the points you have just raised.
Take some time to learn to read between the lines and be a bit more cynical
)
NsTbtw
Who does Rowling think she is, taking to court whoever leaks the ending of her precious Deathly Hallows book? It’s going to be up for sale and if somebody bought it ahead leagally and chooses to talk about the book it’s none of anybody’s business. If you don’t want to know what happened yet then don’t read any spoiler or review, even a 5th grader is smart enough to know that. And please, don’t anyone dare to compare HP series and JKRowling to Tolkien’s Lord of The Rings Trilogy. HP is nothing more than a comic book, just longer and comes as paperback. It has none of the literary essence of LOTR, that which will make you want to read the book over and over and still feel the same emotions about the characters. Rowling is concerned about “the wishes of her young readers”? That’s bullshit! If she is even half concerned about them, she will not be writing about teenage lust and death everywhere.
I believe J.K. Rowling has every right to be mad at the Times. From the comments listed above it is obvious that you are not Harry Potter fans and do not appreciate that movement that these books have made. And the probelm, Bernadette, if you did the research properly, was that there was no “spoiler” warning on the review. And your preference for LOTR has nothing to do with this as this is merely your opinion. However, with that being said I think the mere sales of the book, Deathly Hallows speaks for itself, $8.3 million is the first 24 hours as that LOTR total sales, for all three books have equaled 19.3 million since 2000. So I believe that there sheer volume of people who are fans would have to disagree with you on the point that J.K Rowling has no “literary essence”. And you commented about the fact that J.K. Rowling is ” concerned with the wishes of her young readers” and you say that is “bullshit” as she wouldn’t be writing about “teenage lust and death everywhere”, I have a few comments to make. In almost every fairytale, including ones adopted by Disney(which is considered to be the most kid friendly), death is present in almost every story. Think Snow White, even the witch in Sleeping Beauty tries to kill the princess, Lion King, etc. And I think it is safe to say that in all those movies the princesses kiss their princes, which is no different than HP as the characters are never mentioned doing anything but kissing. So these topics of lust and death being present in children folklore is not uncommon and exclusive to Harry Potter. Also, most of the books are read by adults as well as younger children. You have to realize that these books have been out for ten years and most of J.K Rowling’s readers have grown up with Harry in their lives so it only makes sense that the books get more adult as the years go on. I suggest not to make comments about things in which you are obviously ignorant.