[discostu]

But there’s nothing wrong with fluff. That’s your core problem on this issue, let’s say every bad thing you say about the books is true (and it’s not, the cliche density thing is pure BS), who gives a crap?! They’re fun books to read, they don’t take that long, and there’s nothing about reading silly fun books that prevents people from reading deep and interesting. There’s room on the bookshelf for Rowling and Dante, room for Craig Shaw Gardner and Tolkien. So it’s fluff, get over it.

[Revolting cat!]

Sure, Agatha Christie is fluff, too. But it is well written fluff. The cliche density maybe exaggerated, as I said, I read random two pages in several of the books. Based on that, and having read some critics who cited persuasive evidence, I think those books are simply badly written, if they are richly plotted (though a couple of critics complained that sometimes she has trouble resolving some of these rich plots.) Danielle Steel for the young ones, you might say.

The mania and fanaticism, and the lack of distance to judge their literary value are a separate topic altogether, and I've said enough anyway.