A fan site award doesn’t mean JKR should ignore the Lexicon’s blatant misuse of her copyright. And the Lexicon only claims they used it for the DVD. I don’t believe they did and won’t until there’s proof.

If JKR wanted to destroy “the poor guy” (hah, sure), the least thing she could have done would be to name him in the suit. He’s very noticeably absent! She also could havce gone after his site. Curiously she just goes after the publisher, and promsises all revenue from the suit to charity. Wow, what a monster.

Melissa

OK -I take your point re surgical enhancements and personality changes.

But surely my opening paragraph -which after all, is an opinion which is obviously held by numerous posters on this site, re ” if she wantedto maximise charitable earnings, she should simply have published the book on -say Dec 8 to maximiase the pre-Christmas sales.

Isn’t that a valid opinion. Yes -I belive in honest praise AND honest criticism. After all, this is called a forum where -presumably -some small dgree of disent and debate is allowed.

or am I mistaken ?

M Jones, taht’s why I didn’t mention that bit. It’s a valid opinion, but that does not mean it’s one I agree with.

Firstly, she has never said that she will never publish the book. Secondly, she’s written two charity books and has designs on a third, more than 99.99999% of authors do, and something which she is under 0% obligation to do. Third, she is allowed to do what she likes, and I would feel the same way if I were her and it were my creation; when did fans decide they should appoint themselves the people to decide how she should act, nevermind spit on something that has zero negative intention? She wanted to give a gift to these six people – and had the thought, well, why don’t I do another one and give it to charity? Why are we judging that? Honestly? Why can’t we say, good on you, it’s a lot better than other people do. Do you SERIOUSLY think JKR is sitting in her house going, “Oh, look at all my silly fans, let me watch them suffer because they’ll never read this book?” Honestly, if I were her and saw this reaction I’d think the fans didn’t deserve to ever know what those 5,000ish words were. She wasn’t even under any obligation to publish books five, six, and seven – she certainly had enough money to be going on with for generations. But she said she would finish, and so did. It’s not like she hasn’t played by the rules – you do the work, you write something original, you get paid for it. She’s under NO obligation to share that money with charity, and yet she does it all over the place. And we’re here watching people tear her to bloody pieces over it.

Would she make more money if she published it for charity? Maybe. Maybe not; it’s about 30 real pages, probably, when typed, not exactly something you can sell for a regular amount, and maybe publishing again so soon is just a process she doesn’t want to go through? But most importantly? This is what she decided to do. When did we assume that doing something this way, this time, means she’s a terrible person? Because she hasn’t done it the way you would? She’s not you; she’s given a lot to charity; this is the way she’s doing it this time. Why are we ripping her apart? Why would you ever? What has she done to you?

And what is she getting out of doing this? More notoriety? That’s not humanly possible; it’s news when she adopts a dog, for pete’s sake. More money? No, it’s for charity, and at that, a charity she created.

I get that people want to read it. I want to read it too. I’ve seen it, and haven’t read it, you can imagine what a torture that is, to be so close and so far. But I really can’t stomach it when people decide that a genuine act of charity is otherwise just because they think so.

She has TONS of Harry Potter info we’ve never read and may never read – is she equally mean for talking about it liberally in interviews but not publishing all of it right now because fans want it? In the same way it’s argued this is a tease, so is that; there’s no guarantee it all will end up in her encyclopedia. It just seems people are using this as a convenient ledge from which to hurl insults, and it angers me, when it’s over an act of charity.

Amen to that, Melissa. I agree 100%. Thanks for detailing your experience with the book. Did you get drool marks on it? That can only help it in auction! :o)

I agree, the main purpose of the Beedle the Bard books were to say thank you to though most involved in the production of the books, without some of whom we probably wouldn’t have had the HP books to read in the first place. I also agree that it is far from clear that a mass release book would earn more money than this single book once the costs are taken into account, particularly as the maybe 4,800 unpublished words would fit onto not many more than 10 DH size pages. I am sure Jo also knows that many of her fans what to read the tales, so I am sure they will appear in some form, she might even do it for free (say the next 4 door openings on her website).

Melissa, you’re so lucky to be able to do this. Thanks for telling us about it. You go, girl!

(your former roomie, Laurel

Melissa i support your stance on this. ( And am green with envy over your chance to see that little book.)

I have an opinion on BtB and its possible publication and publicity.

Who remembered the existence of ‘The Children’s Voice’’ charity and its work (outside the fandom)? Certainly not me. It’s not a charity you hear alot about over here in the UK.

So perhaps -> she’s made these books, ‘there had to be seven’, so she had one to spare, so she thinks, I’ll do one for a charity auction.

She picks a charity she is particularily passionate about.

She thinks (or is told by her charity’s people); ’’Oh, look, this charity could do with some publicity’‘

Publicity not just for funds, but to publicise the charity's work and thereby make more of an effect on the governments of the countries where the charity has its focus; to give the charity itself more clout by passing on some of her celebrity, as well as money raised.

SO … She asked her rather brilliant PR people what would be the best way to do this.

And they come up with the Auction.

Now, a handwritten copy of something known to be unique in its own way and one of a set of only seven in existence, known to be very rare with no indication of plans to publish = Very valuable.

Whereas, a handwritten copy of something the rest of us can buy = probably not as valuable to a collector of rare things.

An auction of said valuable, rare object = MUCHO publicity for the charity.

AND some day, those stories WILL be released to us in some form. And why? SO the charity gets loads more money but more importantly (IMHO)....more PUBLICITY.

Ava B

PS The rudeness of some ‘fans’ is v interesting and most provocative, Undoubtedly intentionally so. Perhaps they are sharpening their wits (such as they are) for a future in political smear campaigns?

Melissa

We will have to agree to disagree about Rowling’s actions in restricting the area of readership of Beedle.

I have in fact said before that Leaky has provided a fantastic service for all readers of the Potter books. However, recently and, in particular, since the joint interview so graciously and benevolently granted by the great woman with yourself and Emerson immediately following the publication of Book 6, I have detected what I would call a quite startling lack of objectivity in the editorial tone taken by the moderators on the forum. Now -even the mildest dissent from the party line is ruthlessly quashed and it seems (at least to me) that anything that might even slightly upset the great woman is eliminated. No contrary opiinion is tolerated so we posters who like to feel that we are independent thinkers, have been turned into “non-persons.”

It all sounds rather familiar does it not ?

hear hear to the last few comments! especially: “she is allowed to do what she likes… ; when did fans decide they should appoint themselves the people to decide how she should act.” Yes, I really don’t know why fans think that they own a celebrity actor or writer to the extent that they can dictate how they live their life and run their careers, but it seems a very common opinion these days!

This is a special gesture, to the charity and to those who JK wants to thank. The fact that it’s limited makes it all the more special and will raise potentially a lot of money for charity for that one book. Even the catalogue (I have my copy now) is raising money for charity, and it’s intriguing to see the odd sentence from one or two of the stories (I have been dying to read the BtB tales since reading DH). By the way, the Three Brothers tale has the DH sign on one of the three skulls that illustrate it.

This gesture doesn’t prevent the stories from being published in a cheaper all-inclusive format later on, again for charity if JK wants, and I am convinced we will get to see them sometime. Then again, if JK were to read some of these comments she’d have the right to turn around and say ‘up yours’ to that if she wanted, and I wouldn’t blame her!

It is just typical of people who have received such pleasure from JK’s writing for 10 years to now take it all for granted and throw insults at any gesture that might be seen to exclude them.

when I said ‘last few comments’ I hadn’t seen the one just preceding my own!

One of my favorite film moments is in Monty Python and the Holy Grail…remember the semi-autonomous commune? “Help, look, I’m being oppressed!”

For those who feel there is a sense of conformity in Leaky, the first suggestion I have is to construct sounder and more persausive arguments. When an argument is not based on available facts (or ignores them altogether) and is illogically constructed, then people will not be persauded and will probably rip your postings apart because they fail to meet those two criteria.

I’ve also stated my ‘best guess’ about the future of the Tales in previous related threads. I’m one that thinks its almost a certainty that the Tales will appear “sooner rather than later”. While roonwit (I believe?) and others suggest it might ultimately included in the Encyclopedia we all patiently await, I personally think we’ll see it sooner, perhaps in spring or summer 2008, with proceedings again going to charity. After a lot of thoughts I actually am leaning toward a ‘photostatic’ (for some reason i simply cannot find the word i want in memory, but i hope my meaning is clear?) copy of JKR’s handwriting and illustrations, in both paperback and hardcover. While it would be easiest perhaps to have a printed cover with ink gemstones and the like, I personally like the idea of a battered looking cover, representing Dumbledore’s personal copy, and with a preface by Hermoine Jane Granger. Everything JKR has done to date suggests to me that it is highly probable that she will authorize a mass edition with proceeds for charity. Absolute certainty? Of course not…highly probable, yes, the available facts suggest so.

Since none of us know with absolute certainty, why don’t we all kick back, eat leftovers (if in the US), and wait patiently to find out?

M Jones, your opinion is not being quashed at all, dislike my deep dislike for and disagreement with what you believe. You’re being publicly disagreed with. To say you’re being quashed on a board where you are publicly disagreeing with those whom you deem authority figures is something akin to running through the street shouting, “My voice has been cut out!” You may believe it has, but all evidence to the contrary, right? :) I’ve only ever threatened to ban for the insulting, and as close as you’ve come since you’ve shown respect to that and so you are not in danger of it.

As for the forum, there are at least two Lounge threads I’m monitoring for very obvious reasons, having to do with the Lexicon suit. And in those threads there’s been agreement and disagreement on both sides, insults thrown on both sides, and exactly that which you claim is being deleted is and always has been quite evident. The only moderator actions there have been when a mod steps in to ask people to tone the volume down a little, lest we get into useless name-calling, and once when posting of a private email (which it may interest you would have helped the JKR/WB side) posed privacy issues. The email was taken off the board.

So, again, I say to you, offer proof. I’m willing to believe what you’re saying is true but only if you have proof that cannot be refuted, and which cancels out the evidence I have.

Another small point I want to mention: You’ll not notice me questioning the origin of your opinion in this matter. I could come up with all sorts of slimy reasons you’re against JKR: disappointed H/Her? Remus/Tonks lover? Frustrated and jealous author? Former friend of hers gone sour? Someone who hates English people living in Scotland (and their little dogs too)? But I have not assigned you any of these things. I am someone who has spent seven years in this fandom and has had all manner of time and evidence with which to make an informed opinion about the author of the Harry Potter books. Ascribing my unwillingness to think her foul to some blind devotion is an insult, and an attempt to say that my will is not informed or my own. It is, on both counts. I won’t assume about you, and I think that you would do well not to assume about me or any other fans. We’re all capable and thinking individuals with the right to make up our own minds. We won’t call you a blind, thoughtless hater of JKR, and you won’t call us a blind, thoughtless lover of JKR, and we’ll be at the very least on more even footing. That’s something I won’t defend again, and so if it becomes part of this argument again it will go unanswered.

Thanks, all, who are keeping it civil, and have a wonderful day!

PS, typos: the first “dislike” is meant to be “despite.”

Still travelling, Melissa?

If it matters -

1 – I am not a former spurned friend of Jo Rowling. Far from it actually. I have met her on more than a few occasions, although it has been about five years or so since those times -ie -drinks parties, book launches, industry dos -“Writer and Artists Yearbook”, research etc… and the like.

So -in other words, I have no personal animosity towards her and to be frank, there is one comment in my previous post (the controversaial one) that I really should be ashamed of -and am.

2-BUT -I am a type prone to the contrary (Like Jo was herself actually in former years) and perhaps I did go in too heavy.

Anyway -the one thing I have never criticised is her brilliant achievement with the Potter books. Her sub-creation in particular, is on the same level as Conan-Doyle and Tolkien -and she will be read perpetually.

Having said that – if you do not mind, continue to expect occasionally contrary points of view from me -IF I really do think there is something worth criticising -as I do with this Beedle business.