The weekend supplement of the weekly Literary Review magazine featured a written interview, with a black-and-white photograph on the front page.
The photo shows a thin man in his early forties with a faint, mocking smile on his lips, but little joy in his eyes.
He was wearing a dark turtleneck sweater, leaning back on the sofa with his hands casually folded on his knees, as if waiting for someone to ask him a question.
The caption below the photo is in small font, but the content is eye-catching enough:
"Avant-garde novelist Martin Amis: ' Harry Potter is at best a phenomenon, not literature.'"
The article begins with a brief introduction of the character:
Martin Amis, born in Oxford in 1949, is the son of renowned novelist Kingsley Amis.
One of the most controversial avant-garde novelists and Literary Review in contemporary Great Britain, and one of the leading figures in the field of serious literature in Great Britain today.
Her debut novel, * the Rachel Papers *, won the Somerset Maugham Award in 1973, bringing her instant fame.
His novel * The Time's Arrow *, published last year, was shortlisted for the Booker Prize, bringing him immense acclaim.
That's right, his " The Time's Arrow " and Allen's " Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone " were published at the same time last year.
At the time, Allen was still an unknown new writer, while Martin was already a prominent literary figure in Great Britain.
The number of copies of " Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone " sold in the past year was exactly two zeros more than the total sales of " Time's Arrow " in the past year.
The interview, which the magazine arranged to be conducted in early August, was not initially planned to focus on Harry Potter.
The reporter originally wanted to talk to Martin Amis about his feelings after being shortlisted for the Booker Prize and about his new novel that he is currently working on.
However, during the conversation, the reporter noticed that the author was not very polite to the "popular bestsellers" on the market, so he took the opportunity to bring up the topic of " Harry Potter ".
After all, he gets a bonus if the newspaper sells well.
Below is the content of a written interview in the newspaper.
J: Mr. Amis, thank you for taking the time to do this interview.
We can talk about * The Time's Arrow * today, but before that—someone recently told me you've also read * Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone *. Is that true?
M. A.: (Laughs) I've read it. To be precise, I spent two nights translating it.
J: What do you think of it?
M. A.: (Shakes head) It's... neat, I admit that.
It has a complete structure, a clear beginning and end, and a suspenseful plot that runs throughout. For a children's literature author, achieving this is already quite good.
J: You used the term "children's literature." Don't you think this work has a wider readership?
M. A.: This is not a big problem. I am not the kind of snob who can't stand seeing children's literature sell well.
The problem is that a work written for children can only be considered a masterpiece within that age group. Once it leaves that target audience, its quality diminishes significantly.
J: So you think it's overrated?
M·A: (frowning) Overrated? No, that's too mild a statement.
It has been placed in a position it doesn't belong to. If you are a writer who is used to playing with sentence structure and rhythm, you will find it as bland as boiled cabbage.
J: So, what's your assessment...?
M·A: My assessment? My assessment is that it's a well-made children's book, its pacing is passable, but it lacks any form of complexity.
The characters are flat, the morality is black and white, and the conflicts are resolved too simply. You won't have anything to reflect on after reading it.
It's just repeating the oldest narrative template: an oppressed child discovers he is the chosen one and defeats the villains. We've heard this story for thousands of years.
J: "Children's books"? But as far as I know, a large portion of its readers are adults. What would you like to say to them?
M. A.: (Shrugs) I don't have anything to say to them. I respect everyone's right to choose their leisure time. I just feel it's a pity—they could have spent the same amount of time reading something that could have truly broadened their cognitive boundaries.
Of course, expanding one's knowledge is tiring, while reading Harry Potter doesn't require much brainpower, so I understand why they chose it.
J: Don't you think it has a certain unique imagination? Like those magical world settings...?
M·A: Imagination? Of course. If someone has the patience to build up details in a fictional world, they can indeed write works that seem very imaginative, but I would not equate "rich details" with "literary value".
What truly sustains a work is its exploration of humanity, society, and language itself. But you won't find these things in that book.
J: It sounds like you don't think it has greater literary value?
M. A.: (Seemingly dismissive) The term "literary value" is too broad; we need to define clearly what we're talking about first.
If "literary value" refers to a captivating narrative, vivid character development, and suspense that makes you want to turn the page—then it certainly possesses these qualities. But unfortunately, these options are not included in the broader definition of "literary value."
J: But it sells very well, currently exceeding nine million copies, and it's said to be about to break ten million soon.
M·A: (Lights a cigarette) Sales? Maybe high? A book about a magic school, everyone says it's "fun," "wonderful," "fascinating." Sometimes I think "fascinating" is probably the closest thing to "I have nothing to say" in English.
J: Don't you think the sales of * Time's Arrow * are somewhat... lacking compared to it?
M. A.: (Somewhat annoyed) You think I care about sales figures? If a writer measures his worth by sales figures, then he doesn't deserve to be a writer.
Dostoevsky didn't earn much money during his lifetime, yet people are still reading his works over a hundred years later. Do you think anyone will still be reading Harry Potter a hundred years from now?
J: You predict it won't become a classic?
M. A.: I predict it will be like most bestsellers, slowly forgotten after the hype dies down. Of course, that doesn't stop some people from making a fortune right now.
J: What do you think this nationwide reading boom reflects?
M·A: (Flicking cigarette ash into the ashtray) This reflects that people no longer read books, perhaps they think they are reading a work of literature.
But that's not reading; it's a substitute for reading. It's like eating artificial sweeteners—you taste the sweetness, but you don't ingest anything.
J: Are you saying that the readers who like this book—the millions of people—are wrong to feel that way?
M. A.: (Laughs, but the smile isn't very happy) I didn't say that, I just said they're different. One person might like chocolate ice cream, and another might like truffle risotto.
There's no right or wrong in these two things. But if you insist that chocolate ice cream and truffle risotto are on the same level, then I have to say—either you're lying, or you've never seen real truffle risotto.
J: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets will be released in a few days. What are your predictions for it?
M·A: Expectations? I have no expectations. I guess there will be more wands, more owls, more moving stairs. Maybe a new monster, a new teacher, a new villain.
Then its readers will spend money again, get excited again, and push it to the top of the sales charts again. It will still be a very successful product, but it is still just a product, not a work of literature.
J: It sounds like you're not very optimistic about its literary value?
M. A.: (Nods affirmatively) Let me put it this way. It has its own value, within that specific scope—entertainment, relaxation, and keeping children quiet.
But it's far from literature. To compare it to writers who truly changed language is like a guitarist claiming to be on par with Beethoven. What a joke.
J: So what kind of novel do you consider to be literature?
M·A: (picks up her book) It has to do something new; it has to make you feel like you've seen something you've never seen before after you finish reading it. It has to challenge you in terms of language and structure, so that you don't just consume it, but also fight against it.
For example, my novel " The Time's Arrow " is about time travel. Every sentence in that book is written in reverse, which is to make readers think: if even the direction of time is reversed, can a person still recognize who they are? I think this is what literature is all about.
J: Will you read the second part?
M. A.: Maybe. If my friends all read it, and I really have nothing else to do, I might flip through it. But I don't think that would change my opinion.
J: Do you think it will leave a mark on literary history?
M. A.: Literary history isn't a bestseller list. It leaves a mark on popular culture history, like Charlie's Angels or Star Wars did back in the day. But that's not literature.
J: One last question, who would you recommend Harry Potter to?
M. A.: (After thinking for a moment) I would recommend it to children under ten, as well as adults who want to relive the feeling of reading a simple story when they were ten.
But I wouldn't recommend it to people who want to read a truly contemporary novel.
J: Thank you for the interview, Mr. Amis.
M·A: You're welcome.
The newspaper, once published, immediately caused a widespread stir in the literary world.