Pages

Sunday, September 30, 2012

J.K. Rowling Is Not Your Bitch


The Casual Vacancy, held by some lady.
Full disclosure: I don’t like Harry Potter. Book 2 is a darned fine novel, but it’s also essentially a remake of Book 1, and the series goes lugubrious from there. My friends know me as the miserable troll under the YA bridge.

Hate that J.K. Rowling is writing a non-Fantasy book for adults? Then I hate you. Well, no, but I detest this outcry. A block of fans is demanding she pigeonhole herself with childhood angst and bookish wizardry. Instead of writing yet another YA novel where she’s guaranteed enormous sales and praise, she’s taken a risk and is exploring her craft. She’s in a fine financial position to try it, but it’s still brave, and not nearly enough authors do it.

Look, it’s not that Rowling gave you this YA tent. It existed before her, but not like this, and post-Rowling this stuff that you love is ubiquitous. Aside from detonating the YA explosion, she gave you seven novels at something like 5,000 total pages, which fully ended the God-damned story. To be angry that she writes anything else indicates a disgusting level of entitlement.

Oh, the entitlement. Oh, the things I’ve heard her “fans” decry. To list them would take… well, not an unnecessary amount of time. Precisely the right amount of time.

1)      “She’s acting like she’s better than Fantasy.”
I have yet to read a single interview or watch a single Youtube clip of her condescending against YA or Fantasy. This seems to be audiences overreacting to her simply writing something that isn’t YA Fantasy, perhaps even something that isn’t Harry Potter. All this means is she’s interested in more things than Potter. She’s clearly interested in magic, or she wouldn’t have written so many yammering pages of it.

2)      “She’s selling out.”
She became a billionaire off of Potter. If anything, A Casual Vacancy will be
a substantial pay cut.

3)      “I don’t want to read a magic-free Rowling world.”
Do you read any magic-free worlds? If so, then why not read one by her? She’s never published such a thing before, so you don’t know whether she’s bad at it. If you honestly love this author’s previous creations, consider giving her a chance at new works. Even if she sucks at it, this path of her career could open up unpredictable growth in her abilities later.

4)      “I knew it would suck. All the reviews say it sucks.”
Lev Grossman loved it. Newsweek backed it. I know Michiko Kakutani is throwing clods at the book, but especially for a first adult-book from the highest profile author alive, I honestly expected far worse critical press.

5)      “Small-town politics is so done.”
So are magic kids. They were done to bloody death before Rowling even picked up a pen.

6)      “The price of the Kindle version is too high.”
Not only is this not Rowling’s fault, but her publisher didn’t sell you a Kindle. Your Kindle ownership doesn’t entitle you to Hachette cutting your costs. If Amazon wanted to incentivize with her publisher, they could. As it is, it’ll probably be on their free Prime library in a year.

7)      “But my Kindle edition doesn’t work!”
You’re right. Hachette screwed up on that one, and if that’s your only complaint, please continue. It’s an embarrassment to an entire industry that will probably get someone fired and shouldn’t have been possible on such a big release.

Think about all the virtues in Harry Potter.
Now think about how few are manifesting in this audience.

Most of this argument has brought up sad echoes from Harry Potter’s past. I remember all those fans saying new or lapsed readers were picking up her books and falling in love with reading all sorts of new works. If you have a massive contingent of people whining she’s not writing about wizards, it cripples the thrust. It also feeds into one of the publishing industry’s most insidious stupidities.

You know that particular stupidity, don’t you? It’s the one that made editors pressure Ursula K. LeGuin to write more like Rowling. It’s not only the little guy-and-gal authors who get this; it’s legends and treasures of our canons who have been told to ape the most popular act. Now we’re experiencing the next step in this absurdism: the public yelling at Rowling to write more like herself.

This the same backlash Stephen King got for writing something other than Horror. Alexander Pope still gets it, centuries after his death, for writing anything other than satire. It’s a backlash so common and severe that when God tried to change up His sequel to The Torah, the Romans killed His only son.

It doesn’t have to be like this. Fundamentally, this is about readers feeling passionately about a creator’s work, and that’s a lovely kernel. But we need to encourage our heroes to produce diverse works, from wherever they derive inspiration. There are few greater compliments to someone’s prior novels than in patience and respect for their new experiments. That’s all anyone needs to display here – that, and how to code a readable e-book.

36 comments:

  1. John, if Rowling is a good, multi-faceted writer she'll bounce off the hate-feste and continue to write readable books in all genres for all ages. As I've said elsewhere, I don't believe the Potter books are any better than a series like Jill Murphy's "The Worst Witch", the first of which was published in the early 70s. What Rowling has in spades is persistence, a canny P.R. sense and good luck. As she seems to be a thoroughly decent person I think we should all wish her well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suspect that at the very worst, the Harry Potter series will live on for generations in beloved infamy. Its appeal has been too broad and its fandom too intense for over a decade for even the worst PR to destroy it. What I'm more concerned about is respecting the choices of authors, particularly for something as important as diversity of craft.

      Delete
  2. So basically: how dare someone act like an author/human being and not a brand name? How dare someone have a multitude of interests?

    I cheered out loud when I heard that Rowling was not writing another fantasy book. Not because I hated Harry Potter -- I love those books, mostly for their characters -- but because it seemed obvious to me that Harry Potter showed she was quite capable of writing a good contemporary, non-fantasy story. Actually, I'd love to see her do a contemporary murder mystery. I think she'd rock that sort of story.

    The reviews I've read so far of The Casual Vacancy say that while the prose isn't gorgeous, the storytelling and characterisations are masterful -- which is what I've personally come to expect from Rowling. I just wish they'd issue a trade paperback so I could read the novel without killing my spine. (The day I get a Kobo is looming ever-nearer...)

    If nothing else, Rowling may well be showing that the whole "genre" pigeonholing edifice needs to be less rigid -- which can only be a good thing for writers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hear Kobos are great. I've never actually had the opportunity to use one, even though I had dinner with some of their developers. What's swaying you towards picking up that reader?

      I'll agree with being appalled at publicly treating a person like something other than a person. While what's said about Rowling is hardly the worst of human behavior, most of the worst of human behavior stems from that kind of thinking, and disturbs me greatly. I hope whenever you do pick up her book, that it satisfies in exactly the ways you've described. I actually think, from the six of Rowling's books that I did read, that she has all the tools for one of those small-town explosion tales.

      Delete
    2. It probably doesn't help that writers, especially ones starting out, are encouraged (at least by their new author peers) to build themselves as a brand. Unfortunately, everyone involved seems to forget that, when a brand doesn't try to diversify, it stagnates. If I'm going to be a brand, I want to be PepsiCo. Drinks *and* chips is definitely the way to go.

      Delete
    3. While I see the advantages of brand management, it's likewise infuriating to me. One reason I expose to much of myself here and on social networks is to give any potential reader as honest a portrayal of who I am as possible, rather than a simple strawman. Not that, if I ever made it to Rowling's level of popularity, that it would necessarily carry to even the majority of my audience.

      Delete
    4. You got to have dinner with Kobo developers? Count me as sooooo jealous.

      What I like about Kobo:

      * They're at least partly Canadian (although, last I heard, bought by a Japanese company)
      * their native format is epub -- there's not such a tight lock between hardware and content supply
      * I won one at a publisher's conference (and gave it to my mum 'cos she was going to buy one, but I read a few books on it first -- including some Chaucer just for the pre- and post-Gutenberg vibe)
      * They seem to be the smartest about their hardware vs. content price points.

      Kindles seem like good machines, but they make me nervous because it took forever for them to be available here. For a while, even if you bought one in the States, you couldn't use it outside of the US (or so I was told).

      Delete
  3. While I must respectfully disagree with you about the Potter books(I'm a big fan), I couldn't agree more with the rest of this post. I can't wait to see what Rowling does in a world without Hogwarts, and the backlash from people screaming "Write what we like!" at Rowling, I hope, rolls off her without so much as a headache.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And I respect you enjoying the series! I know my reactions were the minority, and have no problem with others loving them. Are you picking up Casual Vacancy this weekend?

      Delete
    2. Not this weekend, but plan to soon.

      Delete
  4. You speak the truth here, John. I love the Potter series, and when I heard Rowling was writing an adult novel that didn't involve magic, my only thought was, "Good for her." People who bemoan things like this really need to both get a life and grow up. I'm not interested in it, but I'm sure I will read it at some point, just to see what her "adult" voice is like. For now, the price is keeping me from buying it. But that's a problem with the industry, not her. When I can pick it up cheaper, or at the library, I'll give this one a read.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've seen a few articles revealing a little of her adult voice, and it seems amusing. Yours is a great attitude, and I'd expect it given you're a novelist yourself. But it's still the right stuff!

      Delete
  5. Fantastic, fantastic post, John. Couldn't agree more. Glad you wrote this!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm not a Harry Potter fan either (I'm sure you're shocked). I had no intention of reading her adult novel (because the plot doesn't intrigue me), but all the outcry from her fan base makes me want to buy it just because. It's a shame that people attack writers for writing the same book over and over and then attack them for writing something new. Good for her for branching out. So many of us like to write in different genres and read different genres, I would love for more writers to branch out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am a little shocked! Won't lie about that, though I guess Potter does lack smut.

      Looking back on this piece, I do think I've been a little unfair to her fanbase. It's not the entirety that is decrying her, only a sizable and extremely vocal block. I've seen at least a few people on Twitter proclaiming their excitement for the return of their "Queen."

      Delete
  7. Thank you for standing up and saying what so many of us are saying but not saying it quite as well. Writers write. Most writers write from their hearts and the whispers of the muse. They should always be supported no matter the genre. I'd like to see half these whiny brats that are complaining about Rowling write anything worth reading.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Replies
    1. I'm afraid this flew over my head. I can guess from the Latin roots about the beginning of diversity, and easily apply that notion here, but don't know the word as having a common usage for this. Can you clarify for me?

      Delete
  9. I'm really glad you wrote this, John. I have been thinking it myself as well. As for me, I am excited to read her new novel and am thrilled she decided to write something for adults.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Oh good, I get to continue! :-) I read the first Harry Potter book, and liked it all right. Wife listened to too many church ladies who insist that magic = Satanism, but what I saw was a story of friendship.

    I hope Rowling succeeds, and breaks out of the one-genre pigeonhole.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did you know Rowling is a practicing Christian? I always wondered what she thought about the accusations of Satanism, considering that element.

      Delete
  11. I haven't picked up the causal vacancy, and I am not sure I want to, but still . . . . I agree with everything you said. Except for the part where you dislike the books. (I like them. LOL)

    ReplyDelete
  12. This resonates with me as somebody with a deep love for music. I've developed an attachment to some bands, and some albums, but musicians don't (usually) freeze after creating their magnum opus. At least, the good one's don't.

    The most disappointing music criticism is that which comes without the understanding of an artist's right to develop, experiment, and grow. You can't read a review of any of Corin Tucker's solo work, for example, without it being compared to her work as a member of Sleater-Kinney, a band that hung it up six years ago.

    It speaks to how much we love these musicians and their work that we want them to continue making the same (or similar) music, but a love that can't show the same patience and respect for the musician's craft is much more like a teenage crush.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suspect comparing one's present work to one's past is almost inescapable if one has seen success. I would prefer if those comparisons were more thoughtful, as in the analysis of Michael Chabon's books seeking throughlines or what he's shifted away from, rather than the blanket "He's not as good anymore" or "I miss the Summerland Bigfoot."

      Delete
  13. Thank you for this post. While I don't think Harry Potter was great literature the series was eminently readable. And, when Casual Vacancy becomes a paperback I will assuredly buy it. I don't like being pigeon-holed, so I try very hard not to do it to someone else. BTW - I was appalled to hear that Ursula Le Guin was pressured to be more like Rowlings. Hiss and spit. Which are words I type far too often.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The LeGuin story made me see red for a few days. Absolutely unacceptable stuff. And I can certainly see Harry Potter as a smoothly executed story for anyone who got into it initially.

      Delete
  14. Great post, I'm Tweeting this! Love the line 'It’s a backlash so common and severe that when God tried to change up His sequel to The Torah, the Romans killed His only son.'

    ReplyDelete
  15. I want to know where the hell you're seeing this anti-non-Potter-Rowling backlash, because I'm hip deep in character-shipping, fanfic-writing, fanart-commissioning Harry Potter fandom, and this blog post is the first sign I've seen that anyone is other than thrilled that JKR has written a new book in an entirely different vein.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Firstly, I want to apologize if the above post gave the impression that all Potterheads are like this. That would clearly be false, you're evidence of that, and I’m sorry if I offended you. As someone not in that fandom, the reaction to this post has actually shown me more of the positive, pro-experimental Rowling fandom than I’d experienced at perhaps any time before it.

      As to your question, when the book was announced, my social networks lit up with outrage, then quieted in the interim. At WorldCon in August, I got my first real taste for the anti-non-Potter work, listening to multiple rants in the halls, con suite and parties about her walking out on the fandom. There was palpable venom. Since then, I’ve noticed it popping up over and over on Twitter and blogs. This essay itself was inspired by an anti-Rowling blog post elsewhere, which I haven’t linked to because I don’t want to send negative traffic there.

      Delete
  16. I've never read a Potter book and probably never will. I'm not into fantasy, as you know, nor am I into YA, but that doesn't mean I won't read her new novel.
    Your post reminded me of Heller's comment when an interviewer suggested that he has never written anything as good as Catch 22. Heller replied that nobody else has either, and probably muttered some expletives under his breath.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This is a thoughtful, intelligent post. I suspect many of the people who need to read it won't. It reminds me of when Matt Groening first tried to sell Futurama and they said (something like):
    "Hang on, this is nothing like the Simpsons!"
    And he said (something like):
    "Yes it is. It's smart, funny and original."

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hey John, excellent post as usual, but I've got to disagree with you about one thing: "I have yet to read a single interview or watch a single Youtube clip of her condescending against YA or Fantasy." Did you read the profile on her in the New Yorker, where she said, "The thing about fantasy — there are certain things you just don’t do in fantasy. You don’t have sex near unicorns. It’s an ironclad rule. It’s tacky."

    To me, this is the very definition of condescending. It's not just that she's saying, "I've gone in a new direction as a writer"; she's saying the genre itself is limited and limiting. More specifically, she's saying fantasy is ALWAYS for children, NEVER adults; that it cannot address adult desires and bodies, and if it tries to, it's "tacky." (Not, you know, daring or ambitious or anything like that.)

    Writers should absolutely feel free to switch genres whenever they're so inspired - there's a reason I'm so obsessed with Jonathan Lethem - and I'm not insulted by her doing that in the least. I'm just insulted by the suggestion that anyone who doesn't follow her lead is breaking an "ironclad rule" that seems to come from a very dismissive and aesthetically conservative place.

    For the piece I'm talking about, check out: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/10/01/121001fa_fact_parker#ixzz28F3906mj

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hadn't read the New Yorker piece, as my subscription had lapsed. Thank you for linking to it in addition to quoting it. Having now read the piece, I'm as skeptical of the interview as I usually am of New Yorker journalism. Had they posted full video of the interview, we would have tone, know what she was responding to, if she amended herself a moment later, and of vital context. If, for instance, she's really describing how her publishers and the writers surrounding her view what she ought to be allowed to do in Fantasy. In New Yorker fashion, Ian Parker crafts the paragraph to suggest a context without having to say whether or not it's true.

      But out of context, those words are definitely condescending, and erroneous. Of course there's boning around Fantasy. It seems every other comment I hear or read about Wise Man's Fear is about Kvothe's magical sex life. Regardless of whether or not Rowling intended to come across that way, your rebuttal is absolutely correct.

      Delete
  19. I loved Harry Potter, in large part because it got a lot of kids reading who hadn't been. That is the power of great story-telling for children.

    As far as Rowling branching out to something COMPLETELY different, I applaud her courage and wish her well. However, I do think she should have done it under a slightly different name. One still recognizable as HER but different. (Joanne Rowling, Jo Rowling, etc). The reason being is that there is an aspect of branding that's important in that your readership expects certain things from you. Now, had she done fantasy for adults, I could see the same name, just as if she'd done contemporary for the MG/YA market. By veering SO far from what made her author brand successful, it feels like she's dismissing her fan-base of that original series by using the exact same name.

    I understand why she would use the same name (she's a hugely popular author and has crazy name recognition), however, I still think by such an immediate and huge shift from the brand, it wasn't cool.

    Still, it's her book, her career, and her name. Kudos to her for following her muse and heart rather than just churning out something she didn't love.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I was quite pleased when I heard J. K. Rowling was branching out with her next book. I also knew there would be an outcry from some for her departure from Fantasy. I think it's inevitable and why so many authors who do write cross-genre use pseudonyms.

    My entire family throughly enjoyed the Harry Potter series (though I think it could have used a substantial edit in some places), and will no doubt read The Casual Vacancy. She's earned my respect as a writer so I'll take a chance on something completely different. I never judge a book before I read it.

    I am kind of hoping she'll take a stab at the mystery genre. She has demonstrated she has a talent for a series with regular characters, and I think it would be a good fit.
    ~jon

    ReplyDelete