Harry Potter to be Introduced as Litrature in Colleges

[Black Wraith]

Harry Potter has taken his place alongside such greats of English literature as Shakespeare's Hamlet and Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre and is required reading for A-level English students.

J.K. Rowling's boy-wizard has been added to the syllabus in a move that has prompted fresh claims of "dumbing down" in education standards.

Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone is being offered as a 'set text' by the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), the UK's largest exam board, which is responsible for nearly half of the country's exams.

Scroll down for more

harry potter

Harry Potter has taken his place alongside such greats of English literature as Shakespeare's Hamlet and Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre and is required reading for A-level English students

But horrified education experts fear Harry will rob the A-level of credibility.

Professor Alan Smithers, a special adviser to the House of Commons Education and Skills Committee, said:

"The point of English literature is to provide works that have stood the test of time and that allow people to understand their place in the world as others have understood it.

"I don't think Harry Potter is appropriate as a set text; I don't see how it fits in with that. It may be an enjoyable read but I don't think we are just trying to keep people occupied."

Nick Seaton, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, added: "This is all done in the name of relevance and popular culture, but it is not why children go to school.

"They should be encouraged to read and understand the great works of English literature. Harry Potter may be what children want to read, but that doesn't mean it should be part of an A-level."

Pupils taking the English language and literature A-level next year will study Rowling's first Potter volume – the 12th best-selling book of all time and the basis for a Hollywood film – along with one other book for the module Themes in Language and Literature.

They will have to write a 1,200 to 1,500-word piece of coursework comparing the "approaches" of J.K. Rowling and the other writer.

Examiners will mark students on how they relate story lines and the activities of Harry Potter and his friends to the context of the times.

And students will have to show an understanding of J.K. Rowling's use of language, described recently as gibberish by a High Court judge. They will also have to write their own 500 to 800-word story inspired by the book.

The AQA claims it will develop "reading and writing skills through the in-depth study of writers' crafting". It adds that students will have to "describe and discuss features of genre, language and style".

In the wake of persistently higher grades and the decision by Oxford and Cambridge universities to set their own entrance exams, experts have already called for the A-level to be replaced by the International Baccalaureate.

The Government watchdog, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, has pledged to boost A-levels with a major overhaul for the next academic year.

But fears that the curriculum is being dumbed down have been bolstered by plans announced earlier this month for 'flexible' GCSEs which will allow students who fail sections to retake them.

Critics said it would give them a false sense of their abilities and make the exams "almost impossible to fail".

Last night the AQA said: "Harry Potter is a genuine example of literature of our time and therefore entirely deserves its place in this unit. We believe that it will prove a popular and engaging inclusion."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=562287&in_page_id=1770

If only this was done earlier, I would have got top marks!

[adil]

Disgraceful, Harry Potter cannot be compared to any literary works at all, this is pathetic.

[Saufsoldat]

Disgraceful, Harry Potter cannot be compared to any literary works at all, this is pathetic.

QFT!

I fail to see how popularity qualifies a book as college material.

[Amuro-ro-ro]

Oh, God.... nothing much against J.K. Rowling (then again why would I be voicing displeasure?) but it just doesn't feel right.

[Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki]

Surely they mean LITTER and not LITERATURE!

[T4R0K]

the last book is a disaster when I think of it... The ending sucked.

No place in college !

[emROARS]

500-800 words inspired by the book is basically fanfiction right?

SCORE.

>_>;

But yeah, stupid idea...hehe...

[Amaretti]

This was inevitable. They already have nonsense like Jane Eyre whose plot structure is all over the place, so why not Harry Potter? They're not bad books, but people seem to forget that they're for kids.

[hyakku]

Erm....have some of you even read the books?

First off, his complaint that it hasn't withstood the test of time is stupid. Should we wait 300 years and see if people still talk about Harry Potter like they do about Beowulf and then decide? IT is the 12th best selling book in HISTORY, EVER. Something tells me that those hundreds of millions of sales didn't all come from people under 12.

Secondly, for people to say that she isn't a good writer is just envy and trying to get down with the "anti pop culture" society. Strong vocabulary, some really prevalent as well as cryptic themes, as well as literally hundreds of different wonderful devices of hyperbole, well flushed characterization, good employement of imagery, figurative language, and strong vocabulary to craft an unforgettable word that an entire generation will never forget. To say that this isn't relavent is complete hogwash.

Finally, what level college work will this be? I can see this work for upper class higher schoolers to like freshmen-sophmore college students, after that it's not so much that the book is too dumb, but by then people should be working on more advanced works. As for as characters and settings go, she had one of the most vivid and vibrant worlds since that of war torn Troy in the Iliad imo.

[Shamandalie]

:facepalm
I really adore this series, but this is too much.
I think it should be widely recommended for students to read in their free time, but to have such a big part in exams and so... :o

This was inevitable. They already have nonsense like Jane Eyre whose plot structure is all over the place, so why not Harry Potter? They're not bad books, but people seem to forget that they're for kids.

I'd really love to argue with this statement. I don't think Harry Potter can be called children's book after the fourth installment. And it's much more complex than that, too.

[Cipher]

:facepalm Words escape me...

At least do something that's consistently good, like Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter's quality rises and drops all over the place. It has no place among classic literature.

[Amaretti]

Finally, what level college work will this be? I can see this work for upper class higher schoolers to like freshmen-sophmore college students, after that it's not so much that the book is too dumb, but by then people should be working on more advanced works.

It's for A level english lit, so it would be for 16-17 year olds in sixth-form college.

[Kunoichi no Kiri]

Disgraceful, Harry Potter cannot be compared to any literary works at all, this is pathetic.

QFT!

I fail to see how popularity qualifies a book as college material.

Surely they mean LITTER and not LITERATURE!

I have to disagree, and remind everyone that Shakespeare was considered trash prose when he was alive.
I'm not saying Harry Potter is a magnificent work, but it can, in fact, easily be compared to a lot of classic lit.

[Amaretti]

I'd really love to argue with this statement. I don't think Harry Potter can be called children's book after the fourth installment. And it's much more complex than that, too.

Arguably each book is aimed at the age-group it represents, but there is no question that JKR did not write these books with adults in mind. The last two or three were by no means 'adult', they were just darker, as are a hell of a lot of teenage books. As is usually the case with brilliant childrens books, they can be enjoyed by adults too, even if they're not the target readers.

[Mider T]

:facepalm

And just for good measure, :facepalm

I have to disagree, and remind everyone that Shakespeare was considered trash prose when he was alive.
I'm not saying Harry Potter is a magnificent work, but it can, in fact, easily be compared to a lot of classic lit.


Writing for Queens and having a functioning company = trash?

[Amaretti]

:facepalm

And just for good measure, :facepalm




Writing for Queens and having a functioning company = trash?

Sure. And Charlotte Bronte was slammed as a deviant pervert by critics in her time. It takes many years for work to appreciate in value.

[Outlandish]

woooow dammit! this was done to late :angry

i don't see why you are complaining ENGLISH-LIT is boring as HELL harry potter will bring some light to the subject =D

[Mider T]

Sure. And Charlotte Bronte was slammed as a deviant pervert by critics in her time. It takes many years for work to appreciate in value.

But that was more about moral values than writing material.

Anyhow, what would say in 1500 page essay explaining the writing style of Ms. Rowling?

[Amaretti]

But that was more about moral values than writing material.

You clearly haven't read Jane Eyre. It's an interesting book, but plot-wise its a rambling mess. By comparison, Harry Potter is extremely well planned and executed.

Anyhow, what would say in 1500 page essay explaining the writing style of Ms. Rowling?

No A level essay will last 1500 pages. That would make them longer than the books. :sag

There's plenty of material to work with if you know what you're doing. There are coming of age themes, commentaries on classism and racism, child abuse and corrupt politics, strong archetypes and rhetoric devices, complicated plotting, foreshadowing, morality, allusions to religion, martyrdom, you name it. There's plenty to write about. You might as well ask what you you would say on the writing of Dickens, or Bronte, or Austen.

[ZeroBlack]

ok, im a fan of Harry Potter, I believe it's a good book but to put it as literature in college is kind of a BIG stretch IMO

[mr_shadow]

I approve.

[AmatorPlatonisCatullique]

Well, the A-levels have been plummeting in quality for years. This is just one more step downward. Next thing you know they'll be awarding every British citizen a Bachelor of Arts at birth.

[Xenuftw]

Ok, i do GCSE English and was thinking about doing it next year and this IS a very large incentive to do so. But i feel that after reading more advanced books the text is somewhat lacking and there's little description. The story is good, but it's still a childrens book and shouldn't be analyzed in the same way as a book like Wuthering Heights.

[Tsuki]

Harry Potter is CHILDREN'S LITERATURE.

I read it when I was 8.

This is ridiculous.

College level English? Not even close. ><

[mislead]

Uh, I don't think you people understand the criteria a work of literature should meet in order to be included in the curriculum.

See, the purpose of a literature class, is, well, to teach students about literature. And the books which the class deems "required" don't form some elite "Best of" list, but are either supposed to embody the main literary trends of their times, or heavily influence whatever came after them. You're supposed to learn things about literature by reading and analyzing them. Shakespear isn't required because of the overwhelming literary quality of his plays, but because it's impossible to properly understand the further evolution of drama without reading them.

Harry Potter has absolutely no relation to modern literature as a whole. It embodies no significant trend, doesn't introduce any stylistic or structural innovation, and has no significant social commentary. You can read it, and enjoy it, but you won't learn anything about literature from doing so. Which is why it has no place in an English class.

[Immortal Kage]

And they say Americans are stupid when it comes to education.:zaru

Sorry, I just had to.

[Toby]

Replaced by the International Baccalaureate? That is overdoing it.

Erm....have some of you even read the books?

First off, his complaint that it hasn't withstood the test of time is stupid. Should we wait 300 years and see if people still talk about Harry Potter like they do about Beowulf and then decide? IT is the 12th best selling book in HISTORY, EVER. Something tells me that those hundreds of millions of sales didn't all come from people under 12.

The point is best taken from a British point of view on traditionalism. I do not know how well you are acquainted with that, but British culture runs through every segment of life, and populism/quantity alone is one of the anomalies which it does not espouse nor equate with quality. That is, the point he was trying to make is that what values those works teach, and which stand the test of time, as conflicts in the 'evolution' of literary themes, qualify them as good reading.

Harry Potter has not stood that particular test of time. It has not got anything to do with the popularity of the books, which is the precise thing they do not want to express, but which is clearly an underlying reason when the sentiment expressed was that the desired reading is not what they should be reading.


Secondly, for people to say that she isn't a good writer is just envy and trying to get down with the "anti pop culture" society. Strong vocabulary, some really prevalent as well as cryptic themes, as well as literally hundreds of different wonderful devices of hyperbole, well flushed characterization, good employement of imagery, figurative language, and strong vocabulary to craft an unforgettable word that an entire generation will never forget. To say that this isn't relavent is complete hogwash.

Those are good points but they do not pertain to the modern literary movements. The great writers of our age do not employ this romantic category of elements. You can easily understand why fantasy-novels like Harry Potter inevitably lead you into reading the originals, Tolkien and Lewis, but you cannot see Harry Potter as a stepping-stone towards Murakami or Kafka. So its role in the transition is pretty obscure, a contemporary fusion of old elements with the renewed fascination for fantasy, written to accommodate a new funny genre of fantasy-books like Terry Pratchett's Discworld-series. And by all means, I love those, but you see, the complex plots being tied in together, the rich imagery and funny lingo in-between are again not the most advanced sorts of literature.

What it boils down to for the academics is probably the minuscule use of the "intellectual" literary devices, foreshadowing and inter-textuality etc.


Finally, what level college work will this be? I can see this work for upper class higher schoolers to like freshmen-sophmore college students, after that it's not so much that the book is too dumb, but by then people should be working on more advanced works. As for as characters and settings go, she had one of the most vivid and vibrant worlds since that of war torn Troy in the Iliad imo.

I dunno, Homer sets the scene for Greek classical imagery. Rowling's is better in that more people can understand it, but Homer's is more aesthetically pleasing, in my opinion. But that is clearly about personal preference.


I'd really love to argue with this statement. I don't think Harry Potter can be called children's book after the fourth installment. And it's much more complex than that, too.

Well, I did the IB with English and Norwegian A1 High Levels, and I think that if you are doing the equivalent or an A-level you would know that the complexity does not come close to the definition of world literature, right? It has rich language, nice imagery and a bit complex mapping of the plot, but in comparison to the world-class literature that can be understood by pretty much any culture as culture-permeating diction, it fails to bond with non-British norms and standards of culture. Harry Potter is fascinating for many reasons, but it has definitely got a lot to do with the exotic appeal of British culture of castles and tradition for foreigners more than for its complexity.

I have to disagree, and remind everyone that Shakespeare was considered trash prose when he was alive.
I'm not saying Harry Potter is a magnificent work, but it can, in fact, easily be compared to a lot of classic lit.

Good point. But like Rowling, his works did draw the masses, and that may be a leading argument for the quality of it as a literary work.

What classic literature do you have in mind when you say it is comparable, though? I find the differences between Austen and Shakespeare a bit too wide. Classic lit, to me, is a simplification of popular works of literature over time. It has not got much to do with the content or style.

Harry Potter is CHILDREN'S LITERATURE.

As is Green Eggs and Ham. The literary devices there are brilliant, but not quite world lit, even though I would classify it as such.

The only reason why I think Austen is better than Rowling is in the sheer quantity of zing her books contain. Otherwise, Austen could be scrapped for a new author. In which case I think Murakami deserves to be in line before Rowling.

[dreams lie]

For fucks sake, Harry Potter? I started reading it back in elementary school.

[Creator]

About time is all i say. :noworry

[Pencil]

Urge to kill rising ...

But seriously. The novel sold the amount of copies it did because it was thick as a brick, and with language even a nine year old could understand.
I read the first novel when I was 10 years old, no big deal. I got pet on the back for reading such a "big book".
So basically, the language is understandable by children. And that's probably why it sold as many copies as it did. Not because it's poetic or deep.
It's a fairytale, and not an impressive one either.

[勇いさむ]

I wouldn't mind discussing the motifs and symbols and how they work in Harry Potter.

Guys, I'm in the IB program (which is the curriculum European students go through) , and we've read many books, "analyzed", and came to conclusions on many books. The difficulty of the book or poem doesn't matter, the graders and classes care about the conclusions or thoughts the individual student has about the book. I could write about how the motif of different colors in Green Eggs and Ham contributes to a message of anti -racism, and it could be a convincing, good paper.

[Lord Yu]

I disapprove.

[Wesley]

They're making it required reading in colleges? What kind of strings is J. K. Rowling pulling?

[Lezard Valeth]

And long as they read something and become capable of writing properly, I'm ok with it.

[Minorin]

I wouldn't mind discussing the motifs and symbols and how they work in Harry Potter.

Guys, I'm in the IB program (which is the curriculum European students go through) , and we've read many books, "analyzed", and came to conclusions on many books. The difficulty of the book or poem doesn't matter, the graders and classes care about the conclusions or thoughts the individual student has about the book. I could write about how the motif of different colors in Green Eggs and Ham contributes to a message of anti -racism, and it could be a convincing, good paper.

And how many arguable points can one make from Harry Potter? Yes, you can write a 10-page college essay on Green Eggs and Ham, but is it required?

Can you interpret Hamlet? Yes. Can you interpret Green Eggs and Ham? Yes. Why is Green Eggs not on the "'set text' by the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance?" The difficulty of the book/poem doesn't affect ability to interpret, but it doesn't push toward a higher standard.

[Light Artist]

Well, standards certainly have fallen these days. :facepalm

While I respect Rowling as a writer, I find it absurd to place her work among legends like Dickens and Bronte. Its really humiliating.

[Scarlet Pencil]

Harry Potter? Literature? O____O No way! The books were horrible and badly paced! Rowling's characterization (mostly in the latter books) was terrible. Not to mention the fact that she writes the worst romance parts ever. If you're going to take a contemporary book and call it literature, at least have it be a book with some substance to it, like say the His Dark Materials trilogy or something.

[maximilyan]

I suppose it'd be somethig interesting for the little kiddies to read. though i think that woman has enough money. i wonder how much she'll make off of this.

[Red Viking]

To be fair, I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about The Hobbit and The Wizard of Oz.

[Mattaru]

J.K. Rowling's boy-wizard has been added to the syllabus in a move that has prompted fresh claims of "dumbing down" in education standards.

QFT

I did English L&L for A Level too.
:facepalm... I'm glad I didn't have to study this.

At A-level you should be WAY beyond a fantasy story targetted at 13 year old fanboys.

[Denji]

Harry Potter is college level reading?:wha

How far have we fallen?

[Kieuseru]

Harry Potter is anything but college level.

[Cirus]

What is this fagotry?????????

I feel insulted. It can not even be compared to books like: All Quiet on the Western Front, anything done by Shakespear or any other lit that I may have read in college.

That is an honor that she does not deserve.

[iLurk]

The books are aimed for kids.

But the most of the vocabulary in the book is not.

I remember reading them when I was young, I had trouble pronouncing a few words.

[Tokoyami]

EPIC FAIL!

Get that crap out of my colleges. I'd think spoiling the endings to the last THREE books was enough to make some sort of a dent.....

[Minorin]

To be fair, I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about The Hobbit and The Wizard of Oz.

Until regular English vocabulary becomes "omg there iz motif in da sentence", we can consider Harry Potter to be not of a "higher" English standard.

[Darth Payne]

Ironically the word "literature" is misspelled in the thread title. :sag

[Pilaf]

RISE UP AGAINST THE PROFESSORS! BURN THEIR LITERATURE AND HANG THEM FROM THE GALLOWS!

[The_Unforgiven]

This is a disgrace to everyone that's done A level.

[Ikbenik]

Harry Potter should not be considered literature. The plot isn't that good and its not that original. Why don't we make every book for five year olds literature too.

[Gaawa-chan]

Wtf?! Isn't the first book elementary level?

...

Honestly... if they want a good fantasy book for college courses, they should be using something like Villains by Necessity...

[Minorin]

Wtf?! Isn't the first book elementary level?

...

Honestly... if they want a good fantasy book for college courses, they should be using something like Villains by Necessity...

Song of Ice and Fire would be nice. :).
//plot-wise. Not sure if the language level is high enough.

[Red Viking]

Until regular English vocabulary becomes "omg there iz motif in da sentence", we can consider Harry Potter to be not of a "higher" English standard.

Thank you for proving my point. The Hobbit and The Wizard of Oz were children's books when they were first published and today they're considered classics.

A book doesn't have to be as boring as James Joyce to earn a place in the greatest works of our time. Quite often, it's the cultural impact the book has that cements its place.

[Mattaru]

Ahhh WAIT WAIT WAIT!


The exam board is AQA.
Known for their Mickey Mouse exams, poor grading and horrible examples used in science papers. [There was a mirror question about a reflection on a King's belt. I spent a good portion of my GCSE exam giggling at what appeared to be the King's erection, it was THAT good :hehee]

Errr. This means it doesn't encapsulate all English Language and Literature students. My A Level was with Edexcel, covered a good range of decent authors and books.

[Gunners]

Writing for Queens and having a functioning company = trash?

I don't think queens and such went to his plays in the beggining obviously people used the scripts after his death and such but when he first came around I think people were seen as common for attending them.

Anyway it seems I didn't get in here before the elitist ''this is all a disgrace'' crowd of people.

[Yuusuke]

I'm young, I'm reading it. :zaru

[Minorin]

Thank you for proving my point. The Hobbit and The Wizard of Oz were children's books when they were first published and today they're considered classics.

A book doesn't have to be as boring as James Joyce to earn a place in the greatest works of our time. Quite often, it's the cultural impact the book has that cements its place.

Actually, I arguing against your support for the news, if that was what you were implying. We still don't type lyk dis in our college essays, and it'll be quite a while until we see really bad writing (...never mind. Not really. Or..?); until then, no Harry Potter on the list, please.

Sure, cultural impact is a factor in choosing a book, but Harry Potter is not exactly culturally rich and unique. From what does it allude from? Latin spells? Common.

Harry Potter as a standard elementary/middle school book would be nice. Our teacher read the entire(!) The Sorcerer's Stone to us in fourth grade. I don't see why it and its sequels have to be recommended for college reading. :facepalm.

Though, from Mattaru's comment, I'm not exactly that angry about it anymore. :laugh.

[Gunners]

Sure, cultural impact is a factor in choosing a book, but Harry Potter is not exactly culturally rich and unique. From what does it allude from? Latin spells? Common.


Cultural impact it had is highlighting to people the prejudices that exist in society and how it can effect people and how it is basically wrong and why people should change the way they approach and deal with other people.

As I said too many people act elitist over it, because many people enjoy the book it loses it's exclusiveness to some. I swear many people read certain books not to actually enjoy it and take something out of it but to prove that they can read something on ''the level'' by Harry Potter being popular and such it makes some individuals ( In my opinion) feel less acomplished and special so they undermine the series.

[Minorin]

Cultural impact it had is highlighting to people the prejudices that exist in society and how it can effect people and how it is basically wrong and why people should change the way they approach and deal with other people.

As I said too many people act elitist over it, because many people enjoy the book it loses it's exclusiveness to some. I swear many people read certain books not to actually enjoy it and take something out of it but to prove that they can read something on ''the level'' by Harry Potter being popular and such it makes some individuals ( In my opinion) feel less acomplished and special so they undermine the series.

Yes, but this is for the "A-level students" (not that I know exactly what it means, but we can assume that "A-level" is the top).

Sure, Harry Potter highlights the prejudices people face. What book doesn't? English Literature is for both improving the ability of interpretation and improving literacy.

I did enjoy reading Harry Potter, but in terms of quality it's definitely not even on my top ten books for pleasure reading. There doesn't seem to be a need for it to become more than just that, let alone college required reading.

[emROARS]

Yes, but this is for the "A-level students" (not that I know exactly what it means, but we can assume that "A-level" is the top).

Sure, Harry Potter highlights the prejudices people face. What book doesn't? English Literature is for both improving the ability of interpretation and improving literacy.

I did enjoy reading Harry Potter, but in terms of quality it's definitely not even on my top ten books for pleasure reading. There doesn't seem to be a need for it to become more than just that, let alone college required reading.

A-level's are qualifications that you get to enter university with.

Anyway Don't trust AQA, I had the same thing as Mattaru in March (Yr 10). Except it included a misspelling. :(

[Red Viking]

Actually, I arguing against your support for the news, if that was what you were implying. We still don't type lyk dis in our college essays, and it'll be quite a while until we see really bad writing (...never mind. Not really. Or..?); until then, no Harry Potter on the list, please.

My point was that people have a tendency to write things off.

When people think of Harry Potter, they label it as a children's book, regardless of the well-known fact that it's read by nearly everyone regardless of age. Even then, does the fact that it's for children automatically mean that it's not worthy of a place among other literary classics? History has proven that assumption is wrong.

Cultural impact it had is highlighting to people the prejudices that exist in society and how it can effect people and how it is basically wrong and why people should change the way they approach and deal with other people.

Agreed. You can write essays on this stuff.

Take the House Elves, for example. Their subjugation was shown as early as the 2nd book and only Hermione, who came from a culture that was still dealing with the consequences of slavery, could see the rotten underbelly of wizard society. She was constantly being written off as being silly by everyone until her predictions were validated in the last book.

Or how about Dumbledore being gay and how it was never mentioned in the books? That could lead to all kinds of discussions of how Rowling not outing him until the series ended was to show that him being gay didn't change the kind of person he was.

[mislead]

I've yet to see anyone point out how Harry Potter can be considered important in relation to modern literature.

In other words, why HP, and not any other contemporary fantasy novel (of which quite a few are of superior literary quality, in my opinion)?

[Fojos]

But that was more about moral values than writing material.

Anyhow, what would say in 1500 page essay explaining the writing style of Ms. Rowling?

1500 words != 1500 pages.

[Ichiban-nin]

Honestly, I really don't think the language and emotional value of the entire Harry Potter series can match up to the much more sophisticated tones of Hamlet's self-agonising "To be or not to be" soliloquy. Plus Kenneth Branagh was better as Hamlet than as Gilderoy Lockhart too.

It can earn it's place as a groundbreaking history maker, it doesn't mean that it's necessarily better than the predecessors. I expected the final Voldemort duel to be a little more, well like an actual fight.

[colours]

This is a joke, right? :arg

[Minorin]

My point was that people have a tendency to write things off.

When people think of Harry Potter, they label it as a children's book, regardless of the well-known fact that it's read by nearly everyone regardless of age. Even then, does the fact that it's for children automatically mean that it's not worthy of a place among other literary classics? History has proven that assumption is wrong.

It's natural for people to overreact, especially on the internet, so your point is well-taken. That aside, if Harry Potter ever does become part of the required college reading curriculum, it should be quite a while before given any positive judgment. Education needs to be treated carefully.

[Kyasurin Yakuto]

Well, the books can be college level too. I mean, they're well written and have a deep enough plot.

The thing is that by the time kids get to college they probably will have already read the books....possibly multiple times too.

It's probably best that they read something they haven't already read.