As readers will recall, author J.K. Rowling has stated several times recently that she is at work on two new projects, one for adults and one for children. The Telegraph has more today on Jo’s efforts with the new book for children, with a brief interview where Jo says she is returning again to write in cafes, just as she did writing the Harry Potter series. Quotage:
“I will continue writing for children because that’s what I enjoy,” reveals Jo, who greatly misses the child wizard. “It’s left me with the biggest emptiness in my life.” She will, however, leave behind the magical world of Hogwarts. “I believe that it’s good for me and good for my readers that I bring myself to work on something different,” she declares.
In a search for inspiration, Jo discloses that she has returned to the Edinburgh cafes where she completed her first novel while unemployed and living on benefits: “I am very good at finding a suitable cafe. I blend into the crowd and, of course, I don’t sit in the middle of the bar staring all around me. In 90 per cent of cases, it’s the cafe’s staff who allow me to work without being bothered.”
On a related note, the worst sort of Muggles or Death Eaters have been out and about recently, as vandals have apparently made off with one of two plaques at the cafe in Edinburgh, Scotland where she wrote much of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s (Philosopher’s) Stone. The Scotsman reports:
Staff at the Buffet King restaurant on Nicolson Street, which used to be Nicolson’s Cafe, said a small brass plaque dedicated to the city author had been taken from the front entrance…One restaurant worker said:”It is only a small plaque and we didn’t even know it had been stolen until someone pointed it out to us.We haven’t contacted the police about it. It’s probably a waste of time for them to even try and find out who stole it.”The city’s culture leader, Deidre Brock, said: “I am hopeful that it is found and put back soon.” The plaque was one of two set up on the street in honour of the writer. The other – which was unveiled by the Edinburgh City of Literature Trust in 2006 – is still in place, fixed to the outside of the building.
Snapes patronus is the same as has Lily becasue he loved her all his life.
Is this so dificult to understand. Love does not depend on marriage or else, it´s a feeling that someone has or has not. In the case of Snape he has.
Snape luuuurved Lily
I am no youngster and I love DH best of all seven books, it´s fantastic, beautiful and verrrry well writen. I loved the trio intruding MoM and gaining over Umbridge and the scum. And smashing half Gringotts. Huii and Neville decapitating Nagini. And Mollys fight over dear Bella.
The description of V mermed body is a fantasie, he has no skin and is in an other world, no one: baby or adult can life without a skin.
Pls don´t underestimate the wisdom and logic of our kids. Mines certainly know the difference between fiction and reality.
Eva Hedwig, I agree. I have never actually seen a crippled baby before, but I have seen pictures of babies with birth defects, and I have never once had “Voldemort” flash across my mind. Actually, in my mind dead Voldemort and Voldemort’s soul have always looked black and wrinkly (whereas a pure soul looks transclucent and somewhat liquidy-sounds dumb but looks totally AWESOME). At the risk of sounding like a moron, what does “flayed” mean?
I can’t belive people are on here scrutinising a comment Jo made about the end of the series and then comparing it to the death of her mother?! Good God people can we please show some respect! Bloody hell
Anyway, I happen to be in Edinburgh this weekend, anybody got a tip for a cafe?!
When Jo wrote book 7, she said some would like, some would not. A book, like any other work of art, is a matter of perception, and how one sees it. A so-called “adoring child fan of Jo’s” would still say DH was bad if he/she didn’t like it. Children don’t lie, and neither are they hypocrites. You won’t catch anyone below 16 making up adoring threads on one site and saying the book was bad on another. But the fact is, that’s the way the series was always supposed to end, whether or not it would’ve become a phenomenon. And holding that against Jo, because she kept the ending as it is, without making it into something else just for fans sake, is pretty harsh. It takes guts to keep the plot as it is, knowing full well that she’d be met with criticism for it from many quarters.
And just because DH didn’t meet upto some readers expectations DOESN’T mean Jo is a “one-trick pony”.
Snapes patronus is the same as has Lily becasue he loved her all his life. Is this so dificult to understand. Love does not depend on marriage or else, it´s a feeling that someone has or has not. In the case of Snape he has.
Snape luuuurved Lily
I am no youngster and I love DH best of all seven books, it´s fantastic, beautiful and verrrry well writen. I loved the trio intruding MoM and gaining over Umbridge and the scum. And smashing half Gringotts. Huii and Neville decapitating Nagini. And Mollys fight over dear Bella.
The description of V mermed body is a fantasie, he has no skin and is in an other world, no one: baby or adult can life without a skin.
Pls don´t underestimate the wisdom and logic of our kids. Mines certainly know the difference between fiction and reality.
Oh please, of course his patronus represents lily, because he loves her. But why does it not take a shape that represents her before she fell in love with James.
Jo said lily had this patronus after she got together with james. So why was it not a stag? why is it that her patronus suddenly represents her? Wasn´t it supposed to show where your heart is?
You see Lily is a doe, because she lives with a stag. But why is her patronus a doe, too and not a stag?
It doesn´t matter if the baby could live without a skin or not (have to go into this charité-museum where they exhibit maimed babys to check if ever one was born without skin.)
The problem that a defect body was used to indicate the state of the soul is a faschistic view- kind of.
ah forgot to add: of course the kids know the difference, but- and this is not only true for kids -when it comes to instinctive reactions pictures like that start to work.
The Patronus chooses you – not you the patronus, If you change emotionally the patronus changes with you- like with Tonks.
It was supposed that only an adult could produce a patronus, and at Harrys Hearing there was a reat astonishment, when he sayed he used one.
I think that Lily began to produce a Patronus after leaving school and beeing in Love with James it was a doe. Snape maybe made a patronus after school too and well it was the same as Lily. No contradiction for me.
V. splitted his sould in parts, so energetically there is not much left from him when he dies. This is a consecuence of his acts not a punishment.
If I heat water and pull it over me, I burn myself. = logic consecuence
I think that it is important to have the consciousness that we are responsible for our acts, and V. got his result.
This does not mean that a baby born with fisical or emotional problems was or is “bad” it´s a consecuence of something. Like: medicaments or alcohol, drugs,, working in an unhealthy environment ….problems during the birth process.. This is not bad or good, thats life in different expresions.
I have seen a reasonable number of babies with different problems, and never have felt horrible at the look at them: I feel compasion and the looks in there eyes are very special, comming from their heart.
Harry who is very compasionate tried three times to come closer to V. maimed body, but could not as he felt repulsion. I can understand this, some people have such bad energy that instinctively one turns away.
V. had just died, so he has years, tausend of years to go to a purification process to became whole again. And so when he is whole again can be reborn to get a new change to be “a better man, a better wizzard”
Sadly the posters who kept telling me that the Harry Potter books were for children and that the plots did not have to be reasonable were correct. My sole reason for my SS/PS trap theory and my Deathly Hallow trap theory was to try to prevent the plot of SS/PS and HBP from being an idiot plot. Sadly I was wrong and the plot of both turned out to be idiot plots along with the idiot plot of Deathly Hallows. When Hermione told Harry that she had obtained the Horcrux books by accio through an open window in Dumbledore’s office after his death, I was so angry I threw the book across the room where it stayed for the rest of that day and night. I couldn’t force myself to pick it up and continue reading until the next day.
This meant Dumbledore assigned to three teenagers the task of destroying the horcrux, but not bothering to tell them how to destroy one. How stupid and absurd does this cause the plot of HBP to become especially with the revelation that he knew he was dying. I could go on and on, but instead I will just state again that JKR needs to write for children. Idiot plots don’t bother them. Most of their books are idiot plots so the children can be the hero instead of the adults. I think she has made the correct career move.
With PS I agree, Yes it was meant for children. And Jo said so herself. She said it about the rest, too. But after so many adults started to read them, well she had to say they were interesting for adults, too.
I´m not bothered that teenagers are the heros. Why not? That happens in real life, too. But you are right: Why has Dumbledore not told Harry how to destroy the horcruxes? It had not changed the plotline just spared us a few pages.
I can imagine that accio-books was a desperate move and it unexspectedly worked.
But I didn´t like that. It was too convenient. Why would DD keep them in his office instead of destroying them?
Voldemort was obsessed with Harry and had built his own trap in GoF. In this case DD could just lean back and let things ´unfold`. And if he had always suspected that Harry was a horcrux then he had no other choice than to asign the task to the boy.
Well, in PS one could argue that DD gave Harry the invisibility cloak that he could reach the room with the stone so Volds would touch him what led to destruction of Quirrell´s body. But I suppose, as we are never told so and still leaves many questions, this is just my own fantasy and not Jo´s plan.
I thought about it once more: I´m not sure if we can really judge Jo´s ability to write for adults from HP. The series started as series for children. But during the process it seems that Jo got tempted to write more ´grown-up`, but in the end she still had child readers and had to make a step back. Or not.
Do you know the woman you refer to so casually as “Jo” personally? I consider that unlikely. And yet so many of seem to act like you do. You have no investment in her or her life, only the product she periodically creates & SELLS you.
I’ll continue to buy her product as long as it interests me, but I really don’t see the point in wasting energy slavishly following every detail of her life as if there’s some importance in it to you personally.
I think someone else said it already, but seriously people, cut the cords. You’re nothing to her but a means of putting her children through school one day.
That nonsense such as “the fandom” even exists as something tangible to you is sad enough, but many of you take this all much too far.
Such as dumbledweeb. Where exactly do I refer to you (or anyone in that post) as a “fanboy?” Enlighten me, please. Perhaps that is baggage that you yourself carry. And you yourself own the blame for it.
However, is it that difficult for you to accept that not everyone considers the author of these books…and that’s all she is, really, an author of books, some sort of deity? Please come up with a better retort than childish twaddle like “Get a life.” I’m sure you’re older than that & can probably come up with something if you try very hard?
Yes, I’m an incredible idiot for liking an author and caring that she is writing another book that I will probably read and like. I’m also an idiot for wanting to find out more information about any charitable organization and am thrilled that said organization will get more notoriety and help more people when a famous person brings it to the public’s attention. So yes, we should feel completely furious with Leaky for posting such news on the site when no one is forcing you to read or care about that particular news story. Obviously, if you don’t want to hear about something, then no one does.
There are books I don´t bother to read after turning a few pages or even after a few sentences. If one considers that HP is “idiotic” from the start to end, why bother to read it ? Why bother to enter Leaky ? WHy bother to post a comentary?
I myself love books where children are rebellious and safe the world or part of it,. I am tired of incapable, powerhungry, egoistic, corrupt, ... adults who destoys the word spreading unhappiness like dementors.
I couldn´t get enogh from her in books and movies.
As kid I loved Pipi Langstrumpf, she is so amazing and so all by herself
Well DD took the Horcruxbook out of the library and kept it. It was no big risk to do so. There were no potential seeker on the plan on how to make a Horcrux.
I found it very clever from Hermione to sumon it before leaving school. She is a very gifted witch and has a sense of whats needed to be done.
DD gave Harry the cloak to stroll arround and find out things for himself. Especially to find the mirror and learn how to use it, what was important to beat V.
HP is basically a childrens book, for younger and older kids without age limit. Her kids are growing up each year and thats fantastic, she is unique with this. SO every year they have other adventures ahead of them in a different kind of way and more mature.
Wow. I have to agree with everyone who disagrees with Lynn and Secunda. I 150% agree with Cat because when i have my children, i will share with them the wonders of this book and her incredible author. these books inspired me to read and i would hate to hear anyone insulting them or their author! Jo is my hero and one day i wish i could write something even half as decent as her books were!
"[Lockhart] didn't even [i]look[/i] at the book we wanted."[br]"That's because he's a brainless [i]git,[/i]" said Ron. "But who cares, we've got what we needed --"[br]"He is [i]not[/i] a brainless git," said Hermione shrilly as they half ran toward the li
Snapes patronus is the same as has Lily becasue he loved her all his life. Is this so dificult to understand. Love does not depend on marriage or else, it´s a feeling that someone has or has not. In the case of Snape he has.
Snape luuuurved Lily
I am no youngster and I love DH best of all seven books, it´s fantastic, beautiful and verrrry well writen. I loved the trio intruding MoM and gaining over Umbridge and the scum. And smashing half Gringotts. Huii and Neville decapitating Nagini. And Mollys fight over dear Bella.
The description of V mermed body is a fantasie, he has no skin and is in an other world, no one: baby or adult can life without a skin.
Pls don´t underestimate the wisdom and logic of our kids. Mines certainly know the difference between fiction and reality.