Why I hate JK Rowling

Full disclosure: I am biased. Harry Potter is one of my favorite series. Calling them children’s books is damning with faint praise, and I’m continually surprised by how well written and well-crafted they are.

And I think that in the beginning, she was an author to respect. She was smart enough to use initials instead of Joanne Rowling. Because, let's face it, it's still a sexist world we live in and women have to write the "right" kind of book (like EAT PRAY LOVE) in order for them to sell. She committed to her world a hundred and ten percent; transforming silly words like Quiddich and muggle into everyday language. But since she has become famous, her personality has shone through. And man, is it disappointing.

First, the suing of a fan; a diehard, worshipping-her-world fan. A man named Vander Ark ran a Harry Potter fansite as a hobby. He declined to publish an encyclopedia because he didn’t want to violate copyright laws. But when the last book was published and he was approached by RDR Books with a promise copyright laws would be intact, he agreed to move forward. Rowling’s response to a fan she previously awarded? Suing him. Calling his work “inferior,” she went on and on about how she was losing the will to write. Let’s make note that this is after she has finished the world-famous seventh and final book. Yes, he is destroying her. Clearly suing him was the only option. I just have to wonder Rowling: do you not have enough money or do you have so many fans that one of your most loyal is expendable? A slap in the face to him and a warning to passionate fans worldwide.

Second, she panicked about being out of the media spotlight so she made up a controversial lie about one of her most beloved characters. I have no problem with Dumbledore being gay. If he wants to chase wands not skirts, sure. Whatever makes one of the most legendary men in the wizarding world want to get off, works for me. But make that a character trait, not a publicity stunt to draw attention back to yourself. There was nothing in any of the books (including the last one) that even hinted at homosexual attraction. You've had your 15 minutes; retreat gracefully. Oh no, wait....too late. It's a disappointment. Fans grew to love Dumbledore and whether they are supportive of his new lifestyle or not, it's still a cold shock. Again, a slap in the face to the people who live in her wizarding world.

So it seems that anytime Rowling makes news, it is to dishearten her fans. While I will forever appreciate the art and love the characters, I can only be continually disappointed in their creator.

12 comments:

  1. Wow, how did I miss this blog...

    ReplyDelete
  2. That is exactly what i think about her!!!!!And i DO have a problem with Dumbledore being apparently gay!(not that i hate gay people!) It is ridiculous to say such a lie!of course Dumbledore is not gay! i stick to the books thank you bitch (Aberforth says that Grindlewald was Albus best friend!and nothig else) i mean seriously what comes next? Gandalf gay? Donald and Goofy gay?
    OOOOOh and Pottermore (sponsored by SONY)
    but what is she going to do with all the money? once you are dead you can´t take the money with you

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't think it was done for publicity, I think Rowling had always thought of Dumbledore as gay. She probably wanted to mention it somewhere, but her publisher wouldn't let her. I mean, do you know how homophobic children's media is? When have you ever seen a gay character in a children's book or TV show? Ever?

    And she's the author. If she says he's gay, he's gay. Aberforth didn't feel comfortable with his brother's sexuality so he denied it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's true that the characters are as she wrote them. But for a writer who mentions very significant details in what can feel like "in passing," it makes sense she would have dropped the tiniest breadcrumbs to lead us to this conclusion. Without these breadcrumbs, as a reader, this revelation is shocking. And it's very true her publisher could have edited that out--with the level of readership the books were garnering at that point it probably wouldn't have hurt, but I'm sure executives had the "better safe than sorry" mindset. Even though gay characters are becoming more common (Archie comics added one in 2010), they still are very rare.

      Delete
  4. I hate how people will just hate celebrities for random stupid reasons.

    I wonder how they'd like it if they were famous and people started hating them.

    It's stupid to hate other people because no one is perfect and no one should pretend that they are more perfect than others. Especially those jerks who hate Roger Ebert, so they mock his fans! Why? What did his fans ever do to anyone? They're complete assholes!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People love celebrities for random stupid reasons as well. And because we have elevated these people to this level, their actions have more impact than "regular" people. When celebrities such as writers, actors, directors, singers, etc. create something, they are adding to our culture. When someone is significant enough to have added to a culture, their life, motives, inspiration, history, everything is reviewed to determine how this impacted their work. "Hate" may be a strong term, but as consumers we have the right and privilege to critique the works of these people, and the actions surrounding these works.

      Delete
  5. I think Your reasoning Behind hating this "CHILDREN'S Writer" is rather petty, She can do as she pleases now that you have given her Success and Money. In Bob Dylan's Words, "Just Because You like My Stuff Don't mean I owe you anything." Just because You love (Sick She is a terrible Writer) Rowling that doesn't mean she's got to act as a role model or something, stop suffocating her. Not like She cares, and honestly I hater her writing, if it was for 4th Graders all right, more like I despise the fact that Her Writing is loved By Adults, not her work... Just that HP symbolizes how escapist and Dumbed down our world is becoming, when long ago we had new movements coming up at every turn of a Decade, from Sartre and Camus Heralding Existentialism born from the Works Of Kafka, Dostoevsky etc. Or the 20s Golden Generation Or Lost Generation, Broken in the Aftermath of WWII with Hemingway, Fitzgerald etc. Writing is Dying!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I appreciate when authors (and really all famous people) realize the impact they can have on the world and try to ensure it is a good one. I think she was realizing the impact her actions were having on her fans and she made a change. Now, she's donated so much money to charity that she is a millionaire, not a billionaire. That's significant.

      ....and I think you and I could have a delightful chat about writing movements of the past! The Beat Generation, magical realism, confessional poetry--we've enjoyed a number of talented individuals. But I do think we have a few now and that writing is not dead. We're discussing it! That alone keeps its heart beating. :)

      Delete
  6. I dislike Rowling for a number of reasons, first and foremost being that she absolutely phoned in book seven. It was enormous, plodding mess, and a disgraceful way to close out an otherwise wonderful series. I also think she came to lean far too heavily on a couple of 'go-to plays,' the most prominent being the killing of minor characters to achieve shock value. By the time we reached Hallows, they were dropping like flies, and yet it didn't to anything to ramp up the drama because we all knew that Harry, Ron and Hermione were absolutely invulnerable.

    Moving on, the 'betrothals' of the characters to each other was a lazy way to write. To start a book with the children on the cusp of adolescence, and already know who is hooking up with who? Who the hell KNOWS their wife in the sixth grade? Nobody I've ever met. And yet, there they all were -- the couples -- lined up like little duckies from like the third chapter onwards.

    Finally, I despise Rowling for her immense ego. She simply cannot bow out gracefully. It seems like every day I am reading about her tweeting something controversial (just today she elected to berate Rupert Murdoch over something he said regarding Muslims and the Paris terror attacks). I mean, seriously Jo, who the hell declared you an expert on Islamic extremism... or, for that matter, the news?

    I am thoroughly disappointed with this woman. I came away from book 5 thinking she was a genius, but in the intervening decade, I have been forced to conclude that she is in possession of a downright pedestrian IQ, and a mouth she cannot manage to close. Sad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completely agree. I find it bizarre there are no more Rowling haters out there. Everyone has the right to free speech, but when anyone challenges her views she gets nasty. She recently wrote an article for The Guardian, criticising the divisive EU campaign, which I completely agree with. However the very nature of her tweets are very divisive, she can't just agree to disagree with people- it becomes a case of anyone that disagrees with Rowling is the lowest species of human life. She discourages trolling (quite rightly), but then she has a habit of retweeting trollish remarks. It's like she stirs and stirs, wanting someone to react and then she can act like the victim- the Levenson enquiry, the Scottish Referendum, Brexit, the Corbyn Ousting and it is like she is untouchable. While I have been on the same side as her one many occasions, I can't stand her. I also don't know why every time she makes statements she has to make references to her own characters. It's conceited, tedious and frankly dumbing down very serious issues e.g. "Trump is like Voldemort" or whatever he is called.

      Delete
  7. I have no problems with gay-Dumbledore at all, I don't care, but these words: "So it seems that anytime Rowling makes news, it is to dishearten her fans" are simply solid gold

    ReplyDelete
  8. I Totally Agree. She Has Become A Self Centered, Ungrateful, Egotistical, Trolling, Self Appointed Queen. I Just Can Not Stand Her.

    ReplyDelete

Creative Commons License
This work by H.E. Saunders is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.