Mailwatch(ed) Forum

I think there's room for a thread of her own for Joanne Rowling, the exceptionally wealthy creator of the Harry Potter novels and someone with considerable artistic influence over the phenomenally successful fillum adaptations of the novels, since despite being someone with, in my view, impeccable progressive political principles (she has eschewed tax-minimisation schemes, believing explicitly in paying her due taxes to maintain the UK's welfare system from which she herself benefitted, and supports the rights and recognition of trans people and other minorities, including Jewish people ), she seems to come in for a fair amount of flak consisting of accusations alleging the polar opposite of what she espouses.

The latest accusation is one of anti-semitism. The former talk-show host Jon Stewart has observed that the physical portrayal of the little goblin bankers who run Gringotts, the underground bank for wizards in the novels and the fillums, is disturbingly similar to the portrayal of Jews in anti-semitic propaganda such as the notorious Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/jon-stewart-c ... 0597.html
Jon Stewart calls JK Rowling’s portrayal of Gringotts goblins in Harry Potter ‘antisemitic’

Seems vanishingly unlikely to me.

Anyone have any views ?

I'm curious as to whether people have an issue with the films or the books in this regard, and whether that's irrelevant. I can see the similarities between the charicatured features of a goblin (esp in the films) and those of anti-semitic propaganda, but I'm sceptical that was in any sense intentionally malicious, as some on the internet appear convinced because she's a 'TERF' et al. It's definitely noticeable that some online detect one sin, and then all the others follow easily, as though racism and transphobia are necessarily connected and logically inseperable, which, irrespective of the truth of any particular case, is not very thoughtful.

There is a lot in Harry Potter that is morally fudged and clumsy (e.g. the houses and their manichean behaviours; the behaviour of Snape) but I don't attribute that to some delicately and artfully elongated malice.

It's a bit of a feedback loop, really.

Grasping Banker stereotypes are inherently tied up with Semitic tropes (and, since Tolkien, most fantasy "dwarf" analogues) be they positive and negative. It's extremely difficult to separate them because one informed the other. Thus, an author best be bloody careful how they deploy such things.

On another note, if we start battering children's/YA lit for clumsy stereotypes, three won't be much of anything left

I think every depiction of a Goblin I've ever seen has looked like cartoon from Der Stürmer, here's one that frequents my house.

MisterMuncher wrote: ↑Wed Jan 05, 2022 1:01 pm It's a bit of a feedback loop, really.

Grasping Banker stereotypes are inherently tied up with Semitic tropes (and, since Tolkien, most fantasy "dwarf" analogues) be they positive and negative. It's extremely difficult to separate them because one informed the other. Thus, an author best be bloody careful how they deploy such things.

On another note, if we start battering children's/YA lit for clumsy stereotypes, three won't be much of anything left

Yeah, feedback loop is a good way of putting it.

On the other hand, Sir Terry managed to do goblins, dwarves, bankers and *golems* whilst dodging pretty much any anti-Semitic tropes, so it's not like it's impossible.

Statement by the Campaign Against Anti-semitism.

'kin hell. That's much better than my version

"Hello! My name is Jon Stewart. I do not think JK Rowling is anti-semetic. I did not accuse her of being anti-semetic. I do not think that the Harry Potter movies are anti-semetic. I really love the Harry Potter movies, probably too much for a gentleman of my considerable age..."

The explanation is in keeping with Stewart’s humour. He will have a serious point underpinning a silly jibe that hooks your attention. In this case how antisemitic tropes run through Western art and culture. Not sure antisemitic images represent typical bankers in British movies. Unless Richard Vernon and Frank Thornton were Jewish.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59726281

This isn't new news, but I noticed it again and it got me thinking.

The whole debate about 'cancel culture' et al is rather tiresome, and often made in very bad faith. Here's an interesting thing though: irrespective of what you think of Rowling and views on trans issues, why is this about a name? The name is entirely uncontroversial in and of itself, and is part of Rowling's wider creation of the sport itself. So why is the question not whether the sport as a whole should be dropped? I'm not advocating that at all, but in the logic of the critics, surely the fact the sport itself is 'hers' and so strongly associated with her work, renders it 'problematic'? Changing the name separates it to some extent but it feels like a having cake/eating it situation, if one believes that cultural creations from authors deemed to have unpleasant views are to be shunned to varying degrees.

It's basically the Chinatown defence. Polanski fucked teenagers but hey, he made some cracking films. Which is itself a bit like saying Fred West was an evil bastard but look at the quality of that plastering.

I used to believe in the Polanski defence, separate the art from the artist etc. Until a friend pointed out that especially in creative industries, financial success is seen as a licence to do whatever you please. Both in terms of "screw the rules, I have money/can afford really nasty lawyers", and protection because "they're a good earner".

Yeah this seems normal.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/jk-r ... 95395.html

Now Gretchen Felker-Martin’s novel Manhunt depicts the fictional death of the famous writer in a fire in a Scottish castle sparking reviews that the book is “misogynistic”.

Felker-Martin has tweeted about the moment in the novel: “If you’re sick of gender plague novels written by transphobic dips***s, try my novel MANHUNT, written by a trans woman for a trans audience. Trans dykes fall in love and f*** and murder TERFs, feral men maraud in the wilderness, J.K. Rowling dies, etc.”

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 3:47 am Yeah this seems normal.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/jk-r ... 95395.html

Now Gretchen Felker-Martin’s novel Manhunt depicts the fictional death of the famous writer in a fire in a Scottish castle sparking reviews that the book is “misogynistic”.

Felker-Martin has tweeted about the moment in the novel: “If you’re sick of gender plague novels written by transphobic dips***s, try my novel MANHUNT, written by a trans woman for a trans audience. Trans dykes fall in love and f*** and murder TERFs, feral men maraud in the wilderness, J.K. Rowling dies, etc.”

“Feral men maraud in the wilderness”

Wherever it comes from, fan fic is 99% bollocks. Vanity publisher, no meaningful reviews, just a load of log rolling.

And really, "online film critic"? Nathan Barley territory.

In fairness, authors "killing" real life figures by name or obvious expy is hardly a new, or even particularly interesting development.

The killing of Brianna was awful, a heart-rending crime. And yes, transphobes may well have would up her killers, but as far as I am aware JKR has always condemned that sort of abuse - in fact she supports trans people to a great extent, it's the exceptions which seem to inflame people.

Unfortunately, there are a *lot* of "Lord Kobel"-types out there. JKR once said something which could be deemed offensive by those looking to be offended. It was said from a position of ignorance, as in not knowing about every single little thing that might trigger those seeking to be offended. She apologised for causing offence. But...

SHe Sed tHAT wUN thInG ANd musT BE HaTeD foREVer!!!1111!!!


There appear to be a lot of these wankers attracted to the right side* of every contentious issue, and they do the poor sods they're allegedly supporting no good whatsoever.


*i.e. the side supporting their fellow humans.

There's also this arsehole



The demonization of Rowling is really disturbing in that not only is she a transphobe. she's an anti-semite, she's fatphobic, she's anti-black, she hates Asians (East).