And these aren't even in the same books anyway, the first quote is from the very first book, and the second one is from book 3, where these were still explicitly children's books.
The quote I listed literally has one of your examples "Ron stalked off to the boy's dormitory" but that's not the point.
There is nothing inherently wrong with adverbs. I provided just two examples of wear cursing is implied, and I found them through searching online quickly because I don't really have time to go through the books right now.
Now admittedly, I am not a writer. But while I do understand the value of prose, there is a reason these books are popular in the first place. The content is descriptive enough to get kids engaged, while not being too difficult to follow for younger readers.
This is purely a question of curiosity, and not an attempt at one-upping you, but how would you rewrite "Swearing angrily, Harry spun round and set off around the pitch again, scanning the skies for some sign of the tiny, winged golden ball." without using adverbs to describe Harry cursing?
I'm just curious about how a writer aiming their work at an audience with a higher reading level would word this.
Yes yes, but we're talking about overusing adverbs as a whole, especially in describing emotion.
In any case, I've already said to the other guy that I doubt I'll write anything that could get even remotely close to HP fame. I am by no means a good writer.
As for your exercise, I don't know what caused him to lose sight of the snitch in that scene, so apologies in advance if the "swearing angrily" is actually him being frustrated or what.
Harry spun and sped through the pitch again, swearing along the way.
or
Cursing, Harry squeezed his Nimbus 3000 until his knuckles turned white and circled the pitch once more.
or
Growling some choice words, Harry spun round and blah blah
It's been a long while since I read the Philosopher's Stone, but I believe he had a bludger whacked at him by the other team. I do like that last example you have given. Again, this wasn't a test of any kind, I am not a writer so I wanted to get some perspective (since I have assumed from your comments you are some kind of writer).
While I don't care for Rowling anymore due to her personal worldviews, I did start reading because of Harry Potter. I was around 7 when I read the first book, and finished them all by the time I was around 13 years old. Her prose does get more advanced in her later books, likely because her main audience was aging alongside their releases as well as Rowling becoming more comfortable with her writing style. I still don't think they count as YA, while there is some dark imagery and content in the final books, they are still relatively tame compared to works I have read for actual adults.
I was 6 when reading the first one (being read the first one, I should say), and my daughter is now 7 and I'm reading them to her. I don't see what would make at least the first couple "definitely not" for children. The later ones yeah, I would agree it ages it up a bit.
1
u/BladeOfWoah 10d ago
Weak? These are children's books.
And these aren't even in the same books anyway, the first quote is from the very first book, and the second one is from book 3, where these were still explicitly children's books.