igrab
in
grabi_hands
rick riordan sucks but we love him anyway.
People always have to draw comparisons. Every TV show is judged on other shows of its genre, every actor has some famous older person that they resemble. Books, especially popular ones, are no less immune to that. Soon after it came out, Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson and the Olympians series was seen as 'The next Harry Potter'. Certainly, they have their similarities. Both feature a teenaged boy hero who is fated to save the world. But the difference lies in their presentation, which is so distinct as to place them on separate levels entirely.
Both books have reimagined versions of mythological creatures. Percy Jackson is based on Greek mythology, while Harry Potter draws from many different legends, but both have some version of the Centaur, a creature with the body of a horse and the torso of a human. In Percy Jackson, the centaurs are a band of paintball-wielding, joke-cracking surfer dudes, in every stereotypical sense of the word. They are collectively used as a plot device, charging in out of nowhere at the last second to save the hero from certain death. Where they come from and why they rescue him is never fully explained, and is assumed to be unimportant. Harry Potter's centaurs, by contrast, are very serious, philosophical creatures, who believe strongly in clan honor and the movement of the stars. Even when humans are in danger, the centaurs refuse to help them unless their own little world is directly threatened. When they do 'rescue' the hero, it's to further their own ends, because Professor Umbridge directly insults the centaurs' intelligence and way of life. They aren't simply a tool to be used, they play a part in the story as a whole.
The pattern of shallow versus deep continues right on into the writing style. It is a simple case of one of the basic lessons of writing skill: the Show versus Tell. Rick Riordan tells a very good story. There are characters and they get stuff and they save the world, hurrah! Even when a close friend of Percy's sacrifices himself to destroy the villain, the reader isn't left with a clear sense of how Percy feels about it. The images appear as if describing something on a screen. However, JK Rowling does more that tell a story. She builds one, using sensory details, emotional pacing, and truly beautiful description as the grout to the tiles of her situations. When Harry sees someone die in front of him, the reader feels like they are actually inside Harry's skin - not only seeing what he sees, but feeling what he feels, going through the entire experience with him. They get caught up in the characters' emotions, as opposed to simply being entertained by what they do and where they go. Percy Jackson gives you a nice ride, but in Harry Potter, you're on an adventure.
It all comes down to the target audience. Both are technically children's books, but while Percy Jackson stays firmly in that age range, Harry Potter quickly grows into something that people of all ages can appreciate. In the Percy Jackson books, though they're based on Greek myth, the author makes a considerable effort to sand down the edges of his concepts. The gods actually fall in love with the humans they have children with, monsters explode into a cloud of dust and are eventually reborn, and everyone gets a perfectly happy ending. It's quite a contrast to Harry Potter. Serious matters are taken seriously, and when big life questions come into play - death, insanity, betrayal - they aren't glossed over, avoided, or ignored. This paints a much more realistic picture, and even though many children won't fully understand what they're reading, the books instead become a tool to teach them about the world they live in, instead of a simple modern-day fairytale.
That isn't to say that either series is better or worse than the other. Both are witty, entertaining, and enjoyable. But as much as they seem to have in common on the surface, the nuts and bolts behind the curtains are as different as night and day. Percy Jackson is constructed to be a playful romp; shallow, pretty, but unrealistic. On the other hand, Harry Potter is an epic digging to the depths of the heart, and can be appreciated on many more levels. Neither concept is better - it all depends on what kind of book the reader is looking to read. But clearly, it's a stretch of the imagination to say that Percy Jackson is the next Harry Potter. It just doesn't measure up.
Both books have reimagined versions of mythological creatures. Percy Jackson is based on Greek mythology, while Harry Potter draws from many different legends, but both have some version of the Centaur, a creature with the body of a horse and the torso of a human. In Percy Jackson, the centaurs are a band of paintball-wielding, joke-cracking surfer dudes, in every stereotypical sense of the word. They are collectively used as a plot device, charging in out of nowhere at the last second to save the hero from certain death. Where they come from and why they rescue him is never fully explained, and is assumed to be unimportant. Harry Potter's centaurs, by contrast, are very serious, philosophical creatures, who believe strongly in clan honor and the movement of the stars. Even when humans are in danger, the centaurs refuse to help them unless their own little world is directly threatened. When they do 'rescue' the hero, it's to further their own ends, because Professor Umbridge directly insults the centaurs' intelligence and way of life. They aren't simply a tool to be used, they play a part in the story as a whole.
The pattern of shallow versus deep continues right on into the writing style. It is a simple case of one of the basic lessons of writing skill: the Show versus Tell. Rick Riordan tells a very good story. There are characters and they get stuff and they save the world, hurrah! Even when a close friend of Percy's sacrifices himself to destroy the villain, the reader isn't left with a clear sense of how Percy feels about it. The images appear as if describing something on a screen. However, JK Rowling does more that tell a story. She builds one, using sensory details, emotional pacing, and truly beautiful description as the grout to the tiles of her situations. When Harry sees someone die in front of him, the reader feels like they are actually inside Harry's skin - not only seeing what he sees, but feeling what he feels, going through the entire experience with him. They get caught up in the characters' emotions, as opposed to simply being entertained by what they do and where they go. Percy Jackson gives you a nice ride, but in Harry Potter, you're on an adventure.
It all comes down to the target audience. Both are technically children's books, but while Percy Jackson stays firmly in that age range, Harry Potter quickly grows into something that people of all ages can appreciate. In the Percy Jackson books, though they're based on Greek myth, the author makes a considerable effort to sand down the edges of his concepts. The gods actually fall in love with the humans they have children with, monsters explode into a cloud of dust and are eventually reborn, and everyone gets a perfectly happy ending. It's quite a contrast to Harry Potter. Serious matters are taken seriously, and when big life questions come into play - death, insanity, betrayal - they aren't glossed over, avoided, or ignored. This paints a much more realistic picture, and even though many children won't fully understand what they're reading, the books instead become a tool to teach them about the world they live in, instead of a simple modern-day fairytale.
That isn't to say that either series is better or worse than the other. Both are witty, entertaining, and enjoyable. But as much as they seem to have in common on the surface, the nuts and bolts behind the curtains are as different as night and day. Percy Jackson is constructed to be a playful romp; shallow, pretty, but unrealistic. On the other hand, Harry Potter is an epic digging to the depths of the heart, and can be appreciated on many more levels. Neither concept is better - it all depends on what kind of book the reader is looking to read. But clearly, it's a stretch of the imagination to say that Percy Jackson is the next Harry Potter. It just doesn't measure up.