JK Rowling lost out on US medal over Harry Potter 'witchcraft'

[oldironside]

A memoir by George W Bush's former speechwriter claims that Bush administration officials objected to giving JK Rowling a presidential medal of freedom on the grounds that her Harry Potter books "encouraged witchcraft".

According to the liberal American blog Think Progress, Matt Latimer's Speech-Less: Tales of a White House Survivor reveals how politicised the medal, which is America's highest civilian honour, became during the Bush administration.

Latimer, whose memoir was published last week by Crown in the US, says that the "narrow thinking" of "people in the White House" led them "to actually object to giving the author JK Rowling a presidential medal because the Harry Potter books encouraged witchcraft".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/sep/29/harry-potter-rowling-medal

Well, if they're ever up for a remake of the Holy Grail, she'd have an ideal cameo role. Altogether now:
"It's a fair cop."

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. And to think the Repubs claimed Dubya winning meant "the adults are in charge now"

July 2001:

For the longest time, we have been told that George W. Bush is a different kind of leader. He runs the White House like a sleek business. The nerdy all-night debates in the Clinton West Wing Dormitory have ended. The adults are in charge now, we are told, and they are guided by simple, moderate principles that blend compassion with conservatism.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1000370,00.html

Who knew that Miller'sThe Crucible wasn't just a warning to the US about the dangers of McCarthyism, but also a warning to the US about the dangers of believing in witchcraft?

[Anarcho-Socialist]

3. It's a shame that high politics is so anti-intellectual

the term "nerd" was used as a pejorative against Al Gore's candidacy.

[Hopeless Romantic]

2. Presumably the new administration will now be putting this right

[non sociopath skin]

4. Daftness,

Though candour compels me to add that any medals that Rowling wins should be for successful entrepreneurialism rather than fine writing.

The Skin

[Hopeless Romantic]

5. yes but in terms of getting kids to read for pleasure, she is a hero

[oldironside]

6. Agreed.

Seeing a child with a book used to be like seeing a Republican with a concience.

[non sociopath skin]

7. In getting children's parents to buy books, maybe ...

... but, if my humble experience is anything to go by, you'd be surprised at how few of the kids who own the books have actually read past the first few pages.

The Skin

[oldironside]

8. Okay, but the films are very good.

[T_i_B]

9. JK Rowling is a better writer then most "grown up" authors

I'd much rather read a Harry Potter book then anything by Dan Brown.

[non sociopath skin]

10. Dan Brown is a pretty low barrier, TiB, even to people who like his books ...

I'd be interested in knowing which other grown-up writers you feel she's "better" than.

The Rowling phenomenon annoys me a little because, IMHO, she's a pretty mediocre writer, by the current standards of writers for young people. What she managed to do very well is tap into the "zeitgeist" of our current popular culture - nostalgia for public school stories, the supernatural, the clever child among uncultured chavs, sword and sorcery and so on - and produce some good-ish yarns to formula.

For me, she's simply the Enid Blyton of our time.

The Skin

[Hopeless Romantic]

11. and what's wrong with Enid Blyton?

[non sociopath skin]

14. She was very good at what she did. Bit like Dan Brown, really ...

The Skin

[fedsron2us]

12. I am not sure the 'zeitgeist' argument really explains her popularity with children

Instead, I think her success is down to the fact that her young protaganists are essentially the authors of their own destiny with a minimum of input and guidance from the adult world. This is the simple reason why her stuff sells and so many more 'right on' authors books (no matter how well written) stay stuck on the shelves. Kids can smell a mile away when adults are patronising them or trying to get them on message, and they find it a complete turn off.

Tellingly

In 1997 to 1998 Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone won almost all the UK awards judged by children, but none of the children's book awards judged by adults, and Sandra Beckett suggested the reason was intellectual snobbery towards books that were popular among children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter


As for using the public school setting I think this is more a authorial device to allow the children to be divested of their parents (an embarrassment to most youngsters). Similar thinking probably also explains why the hero Harry Potter is an orphan. The aim is to set up the children as independent agents not to allow Rowling to flog some particularly reactionary world view. Indeed, dare I say it the books are probably more existentialist than conservative.

As for Blyton she has sold 600,000,000 books all round the world to every nationality, race and religion. Given the only critics she cared about were those under 12 I am not sure she would really worry what anyone else thought about her works.

[non sociopath skin]

13. Then we'll have to differ on that one, Feds.

I presume that, like me, you've worked closely with young people over the years of the Rowling phenomenon and that we've had virtually opposite experiences. It happens.

As a matter of academic interest, who are these "right on" authors of whom you speak?

The Skin

[fedsron2us]

15. Well I remember the 'Giving Tree' was on book that

was foisted on me by my elders and betters when I was young. It really got on my tits. Apparently I was not alone.

[non sociopath skin]

16. Had to Google that one, Feds.

Not big in the UK I think. And I don't recollect Shel Silverstein ever being "right on".

The Skin

[fedsron2us]

18. Still in print and available from a bookshop near you

if you like that sort of thing. Been around for over 40 years.

I suppose what I dislike are books that try to force children to mediate the world on adult terms or to impose adults concerns on children no matter how noble or well intentioned they may be. Life is struggle enough when you are growing up without having adult insecurities dumped on you.

[non sociopath skin]

20. No, I don't like that sort of thing very much.

I'm not sure how we separate out a particular "kind" of book which imposes adult concerns on kids. The kids I taught loved Dr Seuss's "The Lorax" which does just that. And do books like Robert Westall's "The Machine Gunners," which deals with the theme of "Who is my brother?" in wartime or Morris Gleitzman's "Two Weeks With The Queen" which deals with coping with a terminal illness come into your frame? If so, it doesn't stop kids from eating 'em up.

I think I'd rather let them have the choice ... ;-)

The Skin

[T_i_B]

17. There are a lot of people out there...

...who don't consider Dan Brown to be "a pretty low barrier", in spite of the crap dialogue and endlessly recycled plots.

Personally I can think of better things to be reading on the 07:49 to Liverpool Street, but I guess that puts me in the minority.

[non sociopath skin]

19. And there are a helluva lot who do!

I don't think that even those who enjoy his books - and, for the record, I found "Da Vinci Code" a lovely, page-turning piece of quasi-historical hokum perfect for summer beach reading - would ever consider him the kind of "good" writer who would expect to be awarded literary prizes - which is where we came in with JK Rowling.

The Skin

[truebrit71]

21. Hey! I liked Enid Blyton as a kid!

...

[non sociopath skin]

22. So did I. So did most people.

Doesn't make her a "great" writer, though. More one of the few widely available.

Just like JK Rowling!

The Skin

[truebrit71]

23. She was "great" at the time I was reading her stuff!!!

BTW..whom do you consider "great"? I don't think there are many around at the moment..