Is J. K. Rowling, the acclaimed creator of the Harry Potter franchise, a genius? Or is she perhaps schizophrenic? Depending on how you look at her work and words, she might be a little of both.
Full disclosure: I’m not a Harry Potter fan. The books and subsequent fandom hit U.S. shores right as I was entering high school, so I was pretty much too old to really get sucked into the books. It wasn’t until I was in my mid-twenties when I powered my way through them. And I still haven’t seen all the movies.
I don’t hate them. In fact, I think there are some truly inventive ideas in them. I’m just not a fanboy.
But it’s hard to deny the massive impact a series of books about a boy wizard has had on our pop culture and literary world. According to Statistic Brain, book sales have earned $7,743,000,000. Total movie sales are at $7,216,000,000. Combined with DVDs, rentals, and associated toy and merch, the total earnings for Harry Potter are approximately $24,851,000,000.
That’s a lot of cash. Mind you, this isn’t the total sales of a movie studio, video game company, or book publisher. This is the total sales of a single franchise. Yes, this is over the course of a decade or so, but these kinds of numbers are traditionally reserved to a much large scope of products and work.
Considering this all came from a series of books written by a single person, that’s saying something.
J. K. Rowling has profited tremendously from the success of her magical, little boy. Some estimates place her net worth at $1 billion dollars. That’s a lot of scratch for just one person to be carrying around. Mind you, she didn’t found Microsoft, or launch a world-changing product like the iPhone. She wrote a series of novels for kids.
That explains why movie studios and publishers have tried to replicate the popularity of her books time and again, to varying degrees of success. That also explains why Warner Bros still tries to milk the franchise with spin-offs like the Fantastic Beasts series.
It can also explain why some people consider Rowling’s opinions as some kind of standard for excellence. Even Rowling herself seems to think she is some kind of voice for our society as a whole.
Listen, lady, you wrote a few books about a kid that can use magic. That doesn’t mean we have to suffer until the end of time with your erratic views on politics.
Seriously, what’s the deal with celebrities and politics? I mean, I write about the stuff for a living, so it makes sense that I share my opinions (on appropriate platforms, of course). But why should we care what a pop star, actor, or fiction writer thinks about border issues, refugees, or elections? Especially a writer, who lives in another country?
Just a cursory glance at J. K.’s Twitter feed will tell you what she’s spending her time on these days. If you didn’t know she was the creator of one of the most popular book series in a generation, you’d think she was some kind of Donald Trump stalker. And that doesn’t begin to dig into her political opinions regarding her home country.
J.K. Rowling has recently been devoting her Twitter feed to the refugee crisis, lending her support to the #refugeeswelcome hashtag that was trending on Thursday. After British newspapers published photographs of Aylan Kurdi, a Syrian toddler who drowned as his family tried to reach Greece, on Thursday, Rowling joined a number of prominent figures urging the British government to change its policy. (Time)
Rowling is a big, BIG supporter of forcing England to take in more Middle Eastern refugees. Despite the obvious problems unregulated migration has had on Europe, she continues to push this. Much like American celebrities.
Does something happen to a person when they make a lot of money? Do they lose the ability to use common sense? Since when did the entirety of England bow to the whims of this one woman? They don’t even do that for their queen. And she’s the queen!
It’s also telling that this woman who criticizes the majority of much poorer English folks for not supporting refugees has yet to welcome any into her many large mansions; as Paul Joseph Watson so eloquently discussed.
More recently J. K. Rowling has embarrassed herself over a tweet attempting to smear the President of the United States, Donald Trump. I’m not sure why a foreigner feels the need to criticize the leader of another country. I don’t get up in arms when Theresa May says something I disagree with. I may wonder why Merkel refuses to deal with the refugee crisis in Germany, but I don’t tweet all day about it.
Yet Rowling has made it her goal in life to malign the leader of the Free World. Except, she’s being blatantly dishonest about it.
Harry Potter author and outspoken liberal critic of Donald Trump J.K. Rowling is getting roasted to high heaven for sharing a deceptively edited video that makes it seem as though the President ignored a disabled child reaching out to him for a handshake. (Milo)
The video was edited to make it seem like the heartless and evil Trump ignored this innocent little boy’s attention. Except that when Trump entered the room, the first person he greeted was the little boy. In fact, he spent more time talking to him than he did with anyone else.
Any honest person will acknowledge the fact that Trump has a soft spot for children. You can hate him all you want, but he’s still a human being. He has five kids and numerous grandkids. When discovering that Syria was gassing children and bombing hospitals, he reversed his early stance and ordered an airstrike to disable the country’s chemical weapons.
Call him any name in the book, the last thing you can do is call him heartless when it comes to children.
People like Rowling, intent on slamming the man, embarrass themselves with comments like this:
Mind you, it wasn’t just one off-handed tweet, but a long tirade. Based on an edited video that was inaccurate. Rowling was so keen on attacking the President, she didn’t bother to watch the whole video, giving the man the benefit of the doubt, and learning the true story.
Does this make Rowling a dishonest villain? I can’t say for sure… but yes.
What is she up to today? Virtue signaling yet again about something new.
Virtue-signalling author J.K. Rowling is again being roasted after attempting to pretend her baseless smear of U.S. President Donald Trump never happened…
After Twitter confronted Rowling with the full video, the author fell silent despite demands that she retract her tweets and set the record straight.
Now, Rowling is tweeting again – but still hasn’t issued an apology or deleted her initial tweets.
Instead, she’s right back at it with her virtue signaling. (Milo)
It’s kind of strange that a celebrity with such a huge platform, whose tweets can generate so much conversation, can suddenly fall silent when called out as wrong. You’d think someone with a shred of integrity would acknowledge her mistake, apologize, and move on.
I mean, we all make mistakes, right? Right?
But I guess, in the end, it doesn’t matter what a writer says in their personal lives. Not really. What matters is the work that they leave behind. One day everyone will forget what Rowling tweeted about in 2017 (since Twitter will be dead soon anyway). But her work will endure, most certainly. And the themes and ideas she promoted in Harry Potter will live on, even when her virtue signaling is forgotten.
Some people seem to think those themes are far more right-wing than we give Rowling credit for. Maybe they more right wing than she intended.
It’s the 20th anniversary of the first Harry Potter book, and it’s high time we reflected on the series’ hidden right-wing messages.
You see, left-wing interpretations of the books have been done to death not least by their virtue-signalling author. The left has written extremely long, glowing columns about the books…
All of this is very strange, considering how many secret right-wing messages are hidden within the novels. (Breitbart)
Breitbart’s Allum Bokhari has written two lengthy articles discussing the ring-wing messages evident in the Harry Potter series. The first story was so popular, readers wrote in with even more, inspiring the second. Some of the obvious right-wing themes in the Harry Potter books include using walls to protect different societies, mistrust of establishment (politicians and media), and banning terrorists. All of which can be attributed as motivations for Donald Trump, the modern right, and even Brexit.
Her books go on to explore ideas like the benefits of fat-shaming, tradition over modernity, and the reinforcement of stereotypes. All of which flies in the face of popular, social justice warrior ideas.
The wizarding world of Harry Potter protects itself from muggles, because of the danger they pose (and the fact that they’d demand handouts from the wizards). Harry and his friends learn to mistrust the media and numerous leaders, because of their unwillingness to confront the growing influence of Voldemort. The Death Eaters, obvious magical terrorists, are branded as such and faced serious consequences for their attacks.
Then there is the overall aesthetic of the books and movies that celebrate the traditions, culture, and even architecture of old Britain. Even though the wizards enjoy superior advantages thanks to magic, they ride old fashion trains, use owls for communication, and cherish paintings and newspapers.
The idea that the older ways of doing things are better contradicts modern leftists—whose entire platform is built around shaming the West for its past evils. Traditions—including architecture- are in rapid decline thanks to the modern leftist ideals of multiculturalism, progressivism, and social engineering.
So, what can you conclude from all this? Is Rowling secretly a ring-winger, intentionally trying to make the left look like fools? Is all her virtue signaling about refugees and attacks on Trump just a front? A way for her to keep her liberal credentials with the entertainment industry, all the while pushing right-wing concepts in her books? Books, mind you, that are read by children!?
Probably not. Rowling was not thinking about politics when she originally wrote those books. Most likely she was trying to write engaging stories that would entice young readers, while celebrating things from her life that she particularly enjoyed: namely English culture.
But since that time, she’s succumbed to the derangement of the modern left. In the 90’s—when she was writing her books—leftism appeared to be the smart choice. Liberals were progressive and cool and cared about helping others (or so they claimed). But today—thanks to years of identity politics, safe spaces, and growing Socialist sentiments—liberals look nothing like they did in the past.
It is a group full of radical, unhinged people, completely out of touch with reality. That’s how you can have a successful writer, with books that celebrate common sense and tradition, that is attacking those values in real life.
Because what we call “conservative” or “ring-wing” are just the basic fundamentals of Western society. Everyone—even the Socialists—have benefitted from them, whether they know it or not. They even let those values slip into their books when they’re not looking.
The success of such concepts allows crooked, left-wing crazies to become billionaires, giving them license to virtue signal all day on Twitter. It’s pretty ironic, if it wasn’t so sickening.
Perhaps J. K. and her ilk will wake up in time. Perhaps she’ll realize that she’s attacking a system and way of life that has helped her tremendously and change her ways. Or perhaps she’ll put her money where her mouth is, give it all away, and move to a real leftists’ society like Venezuela.
I’m not holding my breath.