J.K. Rowling And Lynn Shepherd

jallenecs · Feb 24, 2014

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/lynn-shepherd/jk-rowling-should-stop-writing_b_4829648.html

Has anybody seen this article? I'm having trouble believing that it's not a hoax of some sort. Could somebody have been a writer for any length of time, and not understand that it's not a zero-sum game?

Maggie Maxwell · Feb 24, 2014

Yeah, I don't even know what I just read. Because her books sold a whole bunch, she should stop writing so other people can sell their books now? It's not a "You can get only one book" situation. People will get Rowlings titles AND others, because maybe suddenly they've been introduced to a genre they wouldn't have read before. I don't understand the point of this article at all. (Not the mention, it's a shame that adults read Harry Potter? Seriously? We're not allowed to enjoy YA because we're too old for it?)

BethS · Feb 24, 2014

When the writer of the article admits she's never read the Harry Potter books, and then has temerity to suggest that no adult should read them either unless it's to their children, then she has lost all credibility. And that's just at the beginning of the article. The outrages only multiply after that.

She says it's not sour grapes, but her tirade reeks of vinegar.

BBBurke · Feb 24, 2014

It sounds like the author of that article is all too serious about it. There may be a point buried in there that it's a shame that the system focuses so much attention on one writer when other great writers are waiting to get discovered. But that's not J.K.'s fault.

And as an undiscovered writer who is, presumably, being blocked out of the system by her success, I wish her nothing but more success. As a writer, I hope every other writer out there keeps writing and doing what they love. To ask another writer to stop writing so that you might be able to achieve some commercial success is not only selfish and puerile, it's pointless.

mirandashell · Feb 24, 2014

It is just sour grapes. She seems to think that if JKR would move out of the way, she would be famous too. Yeah, cos the world is only allowed one famous writer at a time.

jallenecs · Feb 24, 2014

J.K. Rowling should write MORE, not less! Every little nipper who spends his birthday money on Harry Potter potentially will grow up to spend his paper-route money on your book, or his McDonald's job money on my book, or his grown-up-job money on somebody else's book. Anything that puts books into a new reader's hands is a good thing.

Poor article writer doesn't get that. She also doesn't seem to get that there is always room for another story in the world. It's not like we're competing against one another, not the way she's thinking.

Besides, I adored the Harry Potter series. I'm sure I'm too old for them, because I'm a granny and all, but screw that, I still liked them. My parents never censored my reading choices when I was a kid, I'm surely not going to let popular opinion censor them now that I'm an old fart!

Myrealana · Feb 24, 2014

I'd love to take up the devil's advocate on this one and convince you all that the author has a very good point.

But, I just can't. What a joke.

Sour grapes is too mild an anaylsis.

Torgo · Feb 24, 2014

It is by some distance the stupidest article on publishing I've seen this year, I think.

TomGrimm · Feb 24, 2014

Just sounds like someone who's frustrated with how they're not the next big thing, and is blaming a success story. Heaven forbid J. K. Rowling, a writer, wants to keep writing. I'm sure it is frustrating not doing well when what you see as a book that is just as good as your own is doing so much better, but that's not the other author's fault. It's nobody's fault, really.

jallenecs · Feb 24, 2014

Myrealana said:
I'd love to take up the devil's advocate on this one and convince you all that the author has a very good point.

But, I just can't. What a joke.

Sour grapes is too mild an anaylsis.

The only place where I MIGHT agree with her would be the fact that publishing houses can only reasonably accept so many titles in a given year, and bookstores can only purchase so many titles in a given year. In that case, she has a bit of a point.

But not much of one, because we're talking about ONE publisher It's not like all the other publishers close their doors when a new Potter comes out. There are a lot of players out there. And with the advent of Amazon,com as the virtual bookstore to the world, and the new competition between the Big 6 and self-pub, e-pub, micro-pub, etc, etc ad infinitum, well, that takes the wind out of the sails of that little dinghy, don't it!

Perks · Feb 24, 2014

One of the things everyone needs to take into account is that these blockbusters, whether any individual deems them worthy or not - like Harry Potter, like 50 Shades of Grey, like Gone Girl, etc., they pour a ton of money into the industry.

It's a pretty direct line to see that the revenue brought in by huge successes allows publishers to buy other books. So, I could offer a huge thank you, just as easily as this writer went the other way, to all these mega-sellers for freeing up my publisher to take a chance on a nobody like me.

Reziac · Feb 24, 2014

From TFA:

The book dominated crime lists, and crime reviews in newspapers, and crime sections in bookshops, making it even more difficult than it already was for other books - just as well-written, and just as well-received - to get a look in.

While that may be literally true (because retail shelf space is limited), it's also a fallacy. Just because Product A isn't available anymore doesn't mean I'll buy Product B instead. And that applies at all levels of the retail chain.

I have a suspicion the coffee-shop model of modern chain bookstores came into being in part because for a while there just weren't enough books that a sufficient customer base wanted to buy, so they offered a completely different product (one that was rising elsewhere, cf. Starbucks) to bring in a different set of customers. "If we can't get Book A that you'd want to buy, and you don't want to buy Book B as a substitute for Book A, we'll sell you Consumable X instead. Money is money."

mrsmig · Feb 24, 2014

Torgo said:
It is by some distance the stupidest article on publishing I've seen this year, I think.

Nailed it.

Myrealana · Feb 24, 2014

All the author has managed to do is to demonstrate that she doesn't understand writing, reading, publishing or economics very well.

Well that, and generate views on her article by putting someone else's very famous name in her headline.

mirandashell · Feb 24, 2014

Well yeah. There is that!

Nina Kaytel · Feb 24, 2014

What a God-Awful thing to say. If this writer had his way all my favorite authors would have to stop publishing. There would be no reference for aspiring authors, nothing to inspire a novice to seek publication.
What a still censored male part. Seems like somebody is jealous.

Why can't I read Harry Potter

stormie · Feb 24, 2014

For someone who blogs on the Huffington Post and is a copyeditor, she has a glaring grammatical mistake in the second paragraph.

"...mainly because there's so many other books out there...."

Now on to finish reading the article.

Wilde_at_heart · Feb 24, 2014

BethS said:
When the writer of the article admits she's never read the Harry Potter books, and then has temerity to suggest that no adult should read them either unless it's to their children, then she has lost all credibility. And that's just at the beginning of the article. The outrages only multiply after that.

She says it's not sour grapes, but her tirade reeks of vinegar.

THIS.

And what if Harry Potter or some other bestseller was what got someone reading novels to begin with? I've heard of several people say just that. As many economists are fond of saying whenever people obsess about 'crowding out', the 'pie' itself often grows.

There are more English speakers in the world than ever, and more ways to reach them than ever. In the time she spent crafting that article she could have skimmed some reviews on good reads to find out why so many 'adults' still liked reading it so she could figure out a way to improve her own work more.

Perks · Feb 24, 2014

I don't like that some people are trolling her Amazon and Goodreads pages.

I think she's well earned a verbal stoning for the opinion piece in The Huffington Post, but trashing her work in retaliation is lousy.

Torgo · Feb 24, 2014

Perks said:
I don't like that some people are trolling her Amazon and Goodreads pages.

I think she's well earned a verbal stoning for the opinion piece in The Huffington Post, but trashing her work in retaliation is lousy.

Yes, lousy. Entirely predictable, but...

Myrealana · Feb 24, 2014

Perks said:
I don't like that some people are trolling her Amazon and Goodreads pages.

I think she's well earned a verbal stoning for the opinion piece in The Huffington Post, but trashing her work in retaliation is lousy.

Now that is uncalled for. Post all the arguments you want on her article, but to seek out her work and trash it is offsides.

MookyMcD · Feb 24, 2014

I read it yesterday. Thought "this had to be some kind of satire piece, you're just too tired," and reread it. Realized, "no, she's serious." That was idiotic.

ULTRAGOTHA · Feb 24, 2014

It's clickbait, sounds to me. Write something so outrageous that people will rage-forward it to their friends and HuffPo gets lots of clicks to show their advertisers.

Phooey on that.

I'd like to sincerely thank Ms Rowlings for writing those books. Whether one likes them or not, they paved the way for scores of *other* authors to be published that wouldn't have been published had it not been for the Harry Potter YA fantasy hoopla. And the re-printing of titles by Diana Wynne Jones and Jane Yolan and many others.

Local bookshops were saved or lasted longer because so many of her and other books were purchased. Millions of children and adults discovered the joys of reading.

Yeah JK Rowing! Keep it up!

Marian Perera · Feb 24, 2014

This is ridiculous:

I did think it a shame that adults were reading them (rather than just reading them to their children, which is another thing altogether), mainly because there's so many other books out there that are surely more stimulating for grown-up minds.

Presumably if you had a grown-up mind, you'd be meekly allowing this person to tell you what you should read.

That being said, I checked out her books on Amazon. There are one-star reviews dated today with titles like "Didn't read your book, and I never will", "Haven't read it, but bear with me", "Not reviewing the book (I've never read it)" and so on. I hope Amazon removes these, because they're not about her book at all.

Maggie Maxwell · Feb 24, 2014

Perks said:
I don't like that some people are trolling her Amazon and Goodreads pages.

I think she's well earned a verbal stoning for the opinion piece in The Huffington Post, but trashing her work in retaliation is lousy.

I'm not surprised.

I really, really wish I was.

Yes, the article is sour grapes and she should have listened to her friend and rethought the article, but hunting her down and trolling or shaming her elsewhere isn't cool.

J.K. Rowling And Lynn Shepherd

Searching for Wonderland

Making Einstein cry since 1994

Along for the ride

Searching for Wonderland

I aim to misbehave

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Searching for Wonderland

delicate #!&@*#! flower

Resident Alien

Write. Write. Writey Write Write.

I aim to misbehave

I spell Gray with an 'E''

storm central

&#965;&#960;&#949;&#943;&#954;&#969;phobe

delicate #!&@*#! flower

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

I aim to misbehave

I go to eleven

Merovingian Superhero

starting over

Making Einstein cry since 1994

υπείκωphobe