Michael Moorcock, Elric saga,a true study of evil and evil.

Douglas Adams, hitchhikers, dude you got your towel?

Robert Asprin, Myth Adventures,its probably one of the funniest and most well developed multiple character driven things I think you will ever read.

Joel Rosenberg,the Guardians of the flame, yes deep down I wish D&D was real!!

Gene Wolfe, the book of the new sun, for just being of literary value.

Stephen Donaldson, Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, for shear mind blowing vividness of description along the journey.

Roger Zelazny, the Chronicles of amber, for best dis-functional family!

David Eddings, The Belgariad and The Malloreon, for best sweeping epics.

Sure, but then, how much fantasy has literary value? LeGuin, Vance, some Zelazny (my age is showing). Ditto SF.

As series go, the Potter books sustain interest pretty well.

I don't think J. K. Rowling was writing for the approval of Harold Bloom. She wouldn't have minded his approval, but getting his approval and reaching so many people are probably contradictory aims. Sometimes, such criticism reminds me of Professor Gilderoy Lockhart, whose fame rested on the risks and achievements of others.

I liked it. My kids liked it. I doubt that when I die I will have read it as often as I have The Lord of the Rings, the Foundation Trilogy, Dune, etc., but that's a matter of taste. Maybe having kids of the right age has a strong influence on how much you appreciate the series.

Maybe I am just a Sci/Fi/Fantasy snob, but I don't consider the Potter series as serious Fantasy. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad Rowling wrote them and that young adults today are actually reading something as a result, but I view the series as more entertainment than literary work.

Re: the "they stopped editing her" bit, why do people say that? Because the books got longer? Could it just be that she had more to put in so that she could avoid running into an 8th book? I've never felt bored with any part of the series, and in fact the 5th book was my favorite.

The Harry Potter series is remarkable as a publishing phenomenon and we should be grateful to J. K. Rowlings for bringing a new generation and, maybe, new generations of kids to reading. As fantasy it's pretty unremarkable.

Its writing is so-so, its universe is not particularly well thought out (less so than the Buffyverse and that grew like Topsy), and it's practically completely derivative—sort of a combination of the Wizard of Oz and Tom Brown's School Days. I can name a half-dozen or a dozen fantasy series that are better. But I can't name one that has made or will make as much money.

All of that having been said I read and enjoyed all of the novels. I just finished reading The Deathly Hallows last night. I probably hold some distinction or other in being one of the few people to have read it out loud (to my wife).

James, even if you found the time to read them now you will never enjoy them more than you will when you read them with your kids. Either way, enjoy.

I've got a few years to wait, then! But, yeah, I suspect you're right. I've got the Chronicles of Narnia box set, the Peter Rabbit collection, the Hardy Boys, and some others saved for that occasion, though.

I kind of pity those whose start with the books comes after the whole series is completed.

But never mind: The books make great bedtime reading to young kids starting around first or second grade. Then around age 9 or 10 they pick them up themselves and will read them from cover to cover. Repeatedly.

James, even if you found the time to read them now you will never enjoy them more than you will when you read them with your kids. Either way, enjoy.

It's all a matter of taste, of course, but I wouldn't ever put Hogwarts in the same league as Middle Earth when it comes to literary worlds.