Skip to content

Did J.K. Rowling steal the plot and ideas for Harry Potter?

February 18, 2010

J.K. Rowling with Daniel Radcliffe, who plays Harry in the movies

J.K. Rowling has been roped into the plagiarism suit against her U.K. publisher, Bloomsbury, enabling the estate of Adrian Jacobs to crow that it now has a “billion-dollar” case. Only if you win, pal, only if you win. Here’s why I think that won’t happen.

Jacobs’ estate filed suit against Bloomsbury last June, claiming the plot and many of the ideas in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2000), were lifted from The Adventures of Willy the Wizard–No. 1 Livid Land, published by a small company in 1987.

Rowling’s publisher, Bloomsbury, says the Jacobs estate first came forward with the claim in 2004, reports the Independent, but “it had been unable to identify any text in the Potter books which had been copied.”

Max Markson, a PR spokesman for the Jacobs estate, says it’s not the words but the plot and the ideas Rowling lifted.

“We believe that she personally plagiarised the Willy the Wizard book,” Markson tells the Guardian. “All of Willy the Wizard is in the Goblet of Fire. We now have a case which is not just against Bloomsbury.”

Rowling was added yesterday, after the Jacobs estate learned the statute of limitations on suing her had not yet expired.

Which is where the billion dollars supposedly will come from. While Jacobs died in 1997, destitute after losing his money in the market crash of 1987, Rowling’s seven-novel Potter series has sold hundreds of millions of copies worldwide, fostered an equally successful film franchise, been turned into an attraction at Universal’s them park in Orlando, and made her the richest writer in the world, with a personal fortune estimated at more than $500 million.

The points of alleged similarity between the books: A boy wizard, a wizarding school, a train taking wizards between realms, a contest involving a puzzle the hero solves in a bathroom with the help of friends, hostages held by magical creatures.

If that sounds potentially damning, though, consider: Willy the Wizard is a 36-page book, a one-off by a lawyer and accountant, while Rowling’s work is a richly imagined novel of 734 pages.

What’s more, the idea of a fantasy story set in a school for young wizards and witches did not originate with Jacobs, and in fact, is not uncommon. Ursula K. Le Guinn’s Earthsea series (first published in 1968, by the way), is one critically acclaimed and much-loved example. Jane Yolen’s Wizard’s Hall is another.

I have to admire the audacity of the Jacobs’ estate — after all, if they win they get a piece of the most successful literary endeavor in history.

Rowling calls the Jacobs claims “absurd,” and I expect the London courts to agree.

What do you think?

About these ads
49 Comments leave one →
  1. February 18, 2010 2:19 pm

    Not a chance. What is great is the system over there will make the people suing state and prove the case. If it was in our court it could be dragged on for years and Rowling would have to prove it was hers, totally different.

    The same on pattens here. It is simply who has the most money. Plain and simple. In England the party making the charges has to prove it is there’s. Big difference. In England the case is usually heard very quickly. Here it goes on for 5 to 8 years. On purpose.

    I do not think this has happened . They would of been out long ago in court looking for royalties. They waited an awful long time to come forward.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      February 18, 2010 7:59 pm

      Oh, I have a little more faith in our system than you do, Mike. I don’t think too many plagiarism suits succeed. I certainly don’t think this one would.

      • Hannah Hardisty permalink
        March 15, 2011 5:16 pm

        not a plagrism i think

  2. Tommy permalink
    February 18, 2010 2:28 pm

    “a contest involving a puzzle the hero
    solves in a bathroom with the help of friends”

    I can barely type because of the tears.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      February 18, 2010 7:59 pm

      There, there, Tommy. It will be all right. No need to cry.

      • Tommy permalink
        February 19, 2010 1:15 pm

        Yes, those were tears of hysterical laughter. That line really made me laugh out loud. Appealed to my juvenile sense of humor. Yes, I can be juvenile when I am not being all together way too serious.

  3. Candice permalink
    February 18, 2010 2:54 pm

    Orginality is overrated. The Jacob’s estate will have to pull out some real black magic to win this one.

    Love the photo. Didn’t realize Rowlings is so attractive.

    • Tommy permalink
      February 18, 2010 3:37 pm

      She is pretty isn’t she. Looks like Ellen Barkin. Not only is she attractive she is funny. Which makes her more attractive. I saw a video on ted.com where she spoke at a Harvard Commencement and was able to handle her fear of speaking by relating a story to the crowd about how she couldn’t remember what had been said by the speaker at her graduation, so no worries, you probably won’t remember either. She also proclaimed there was an expiration date on blaming your parents for them leading you wrong. She speaks at length on her beginings where she was poor. So good for her that she is rich now off her work. Great video from a great site. here’s the link:

      http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jk_rowling_the_fringe_benefits_of_failure.html

      Now, I must go back to laughing about the contest.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      February 18, 2010 8:02 pm

      Ooohhh. Those were tears of laughter, I see. Rowling is a talented writer, and I’m sure a no-talent like the late Mr. Jacobs will have little chance of prevailing in court.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      February 18, 2010 8:05 pm

      Yes, Rowling is good looking as well as rich and talented, which seems so unfair, doesn’t it? She’s probably athletic and multilingual, too.

    • satwinder singh permalink
      October 2, 2010 3:21 am

      what does she look like without make-up?
      they even make dogs look like people nowadays…

    • Maccalusso permalink
      January 2, 2011 8:00 pm

      She’s not. She got a complete makeover with the proceeds from her plagiarism.

  4. rachel permalink
    February 18, 2010 3:06 pm

    Yes the grounds on which they have to base their argument seem pretty thin. I mean, like you said some of the ideas in Harry Potter go way way back. And the idea of a wizard school seems so obvious, it’s always kind of been that one wizard has to teach another. And Chauncey Mabe, I think that it is a key point that Jacobs book was 36 pages. How much copying can there be? Seems a little ridiculous.

    But why does she have to be so rich? Why are most authors so poor and she so wealthy? The distance between the two is sad.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      February 18, 2010 8:03 pm

      I would say that I don’t see why anyone needs to be quite that rich, but then I’d sound like maybe, perhaps a socialist. Can’t have that, can we?

  5. John Karwacki permalink
    February 18, 2010 4:02 pm

    “ambulance chaserous…”

  6. Chauncey Mabe permalink*
    February 18, 2010 8:04 pm

    Attempting to cash in, that’s for sure.

  7. Candice permalink
    February 18, 2010 9:56 pm

    She knows what it’s like to be poor though, Rachel. If I am remembering her “story” correctly.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      February 19, 2010 12:25 am

      I think her story is mostly credible, though she always had the support of her mum and da.

      • rachel permalink
        February 19, 2010 12:17 pm

        Yes, but that isn’t what is so distressing to me, I’m glad she’s made it and all. What is so troubling to me is that she has to go from being poor to being filthy rich. Five, ten, fifteen million, you reckon that ought to be enough for someone to do anything they wanted, but she’s got $500 million. That’s upsetting. It’s like movie stars and athletes, why does it have to be that the poor are so poor and the rich so rich? Why is the gap so vast?

        Uh-oh, Chauncey Mabe, am I starting to sound like a communist?

  8. February 19, 2010 12:36 pm

    500 milllllllion. really. Well I think she likes me. I could tell by the way she looked at me in the picture above. Chauncey can you get me a date. I promise I will only tell you how it goes. In my book one of the Murples is named J.K. Question to all. Is it this J. K? Or not?
    Hint .
    You will be introduced to a special Murple named J.K. and she is really swell and a friend of Okay. She is in charge of imagination, for tomorrow and for this day. She will teach you in her own way, to dream while you are young and dream while you are old , or so the story is told. Now who is it?

    Also I have a book signing, a book give away and ” reading is most important”, talk, at the Delray Beach Library on Feb. 25, at 3:3. Every one is welcome.

  9. Tommy permalink
    February 19, 2010 12:59 pm

    If Bloomsbury did not have the amount of controversy surrounding it that they do and Ms. Rowling wasn’t as successful as she obviously is, I would think this whole case was manufactured.

    In other news: I am filing suit against James Cameron for copyright infringement. I seem to remember being in a bar with Cameron when I started screaming about blue monkeys with ponytails. Man, did he ruin my idea or what?

  10. February 19, 2010 2:24 pm

    Tommy,

    I heard you, honest. Do you want to talk with my attorney. For a hamburger today, that I will pay you on Tuesday for. I am in.

  11. Zack Gold permalink
    February 19, 2010 5:06 pm

    I do not think that she stole the ideas. But in the same breath her ideas were not that original. I mean this story has been out there in very similar forms.

    Aside from that who is excited about the harry potter them park about to open Spring of 2010.

    Some great info here about it : http://www.harrypotterworldorlando.com

  12. John Sheehan permalink
    February 27, 2010 11:13 pm

    Chauncey,
    The healthy scepticism concerning Rowling and the saintly myth built around her that you expressed in In the Free Lance Star of Aug 29th 2002 has clearly deserted you. In that article(http://news.google.com/newspapersid=8C4zAAAAIBAJ&sjid=SQgGAAAAIBAJ&pg=1929%2C8405423)
    you raise your eyebrows not only at the carefully constructed myth of the ‘struggling Rowling’ but at the British press’ ‘restrained’ treatment of the incubating literary British Icon.

    The establishment needed a Rowling at the time and that is why she exists, unperturbed, as unapproachable as a president’s limousine…. and unexamined. She is brought out occasionally to answer well-screened or pre-prerpared questions. The first to drink to the success of her next blockbuster will be the boys down at the Conservative and Liberal clubs around London. The mistake you all make of course is that Rowling is a solitary Romantic of the Virginia Woolf strain staring off into the Scottish mists in the wee hours as she harvests her teeming brain, etc, etc. All nonsense and drivel. Where did you get all that stuff from?

    The entire schema of the Harry Potter series is constructed with orchestrated calculation and deliberate contrivance with one eye on book sales and the other on movie productions. It is to literary art per se what coal mining is to ice skating. And if there are not more than one person actively involved in the writing and montaging of it I will eat this computer. Why none of you dare think this, let alone express it, is what you really do have to address. Nobody wants to be out of line. “We can’t all be wrong,” is the argument. Thirty million Germans marched behind the Fuhrer not so very long ago, many of them every bit as smart as you or I …. but all of them deluded.

    “Rowling” is legion and she is firecely guarded by her agent and ‘discoverer” Christopher Little. That she (they?) is a plagiarist is beyond dispute in my modest opinion. How big? and how serious? are the only questions remaining.

    Her active supporters are many and the deluded many more, making just criticism difficult if not impossible. There is scarcely a writer in my memory who has escaped scrutiny with the success of Rowling. But, escaping scrutiny is exactly what the Harry Potter construction workers are all about and indeed one or two of the blogs you read here and which are repeated verabatim in other places on the net are designed to do just that ….PREVENT SCRUTINY. Where indeed is her agent Little? Has anyone ever heard him speak?

    If Rowling were entirely innocent she would not be making a move to stop the case being heard in the High Court. If the case goes ahead, as most fair-minded people hope it does, I would suggest you study ‘her’ next move very carefully, and the move after that, and the one after that….because if these sods are not hell-bent on leaving Jacobs’ people under Marble Arch with begging bowls then your naievety is serious as typhoid. Saints don’t do that kind of thing I hear you protest, especially good-looking rich ones. Yea, right.

    Bloggers and press have made much of the amount involved in the case unaware that punitive charges are all the victims are left with as criminal charges against the establishment-protected Icon are impossible. You would have as much chance of dragging the Duke of Edinburgh into the dock as J.K. Rowling; something Mohamed Al Fayed discovered to his immense cost. That man still cannot get a British passport.

    If the Jacobs’ people are convinced Willy the Wizard was gutted by Rowling, as seems to have been the case to anyone with a mind left they can call their own, maybe Chauncey, you can tell them how much they should sue her for, bearing in mind she and her co-workers would more likely be prepared to be burnt at the stake than part with a dime.

    • Tommy permalink
      February 28, 2010 11:16 pm

      How could I have been so blind. I see it now.

      J.K. Rowling equals The Neu Fuhrer
      Christopher Little equals Goebbels
      Hermione equals Leni Riefenstahl
      Harry is Colonel Klink
      Dumbledorf is Sergeant Schultz

      • Hannah Hardisty permalink
        March 15, 2011 5:21 pm

        yeah…

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      September 27, 2010 4:37 pm

      Pardon me. But the skepticism I expressed in that 2002 story on Rowling was in regard to the origins myth of Rowling as a single mother on the dole, writing in a coffee shop because her flat was too cold. In fact, she was never far from the support of her well-off parents, etc., etc. I have never been skeptical about her talent or her achievement in writing the Harry Potter books.

  13. John Sheehan permalink
    March 1, 2010 2:21 am

    Good Man Tommy!
    When the case gets to court …. if it is ever allowed…. you will see how close to the mark you really are….. at least with the first two. We might even get a glimpse of Little in court who could have taught your comparison Goebbels a thing or two about hoodwinking the media. The rest are mere fictions and don’t count and never did, not even as fictions … …. unless, of course, you can tell us all where they really came from. From dat big ole bag called “precedents” perhaps? I wouldn’t give them that much credit, personally.

  14. Rach permalink
    June 16, 2010 11:48 pm

    One of my teachers read us the Willy the Wizard book mentioned above when the Harry Potter phenomenon kicked in around the time of the first film. If you’ve read the Willy the Wizard book and the Harry Potter novels then you know how strikingly similar the two storylines actually are. I agree that the idea of wizards and wizarding worlds is extremely old, reaching far back into the middle ages; however, it’s not just the basic story that’s the same. There are individuals scenes in the two books that are very similar and I find it hard to believe that Rowling didn’t maybe receive some kind of “inspiration” from this story. There are other accusations of Rowling stealing story ideas as well. Through the Make A Wish foundation, a young boy got to meet Rowling and interview her on a TV program. He was asked what he thought might happen next in the books, what he would like to see happen in the story (the last three books had not yet been published at this time). The little boy must have been a mind-reader because a large number of his character and plot ideas where featured in the next books. It seems to me that Rowland has a hard time coming up with her own ideas for things. And the difference in the length of the books has nothing to do with it. Once someone has taken a basic idea for a story, they can expand on backgrounds and character plots easily enough.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      July 16, 2011 1:34 am

      “Easily enough?” Hahaha. If it were easy, more people would do it. Heck, I’d do it. I’d love to have a billion dollars in the bank and the devotion of hundreds of millions of children all over the world…

  15. John Sheehan permalink
    August 7, 2010 9:39 pm

    Thanks Rach,
    These things I learnt from your reply. Not everybody is deluded. Not everybody imagines they know Rowling the person whom they have never met and never will. Not everybody has swallowed wholesale what Rowling’s PR people (who constructed her) have dished out to the public because that is all you ‘know’ about her… what you were given to ‘know’….. and a great deal of it is straightforward lies. Lastly, there are people, like you, who can still make up their minds just as the judge who is pondering the case at London’s High Court will hopefully do.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      July 16, 2011 1:36 am

      So let me get this straight: The criteria for being able to think for oneself is agreement with the paranoid conclusions of John Sheehan?

  16. Sarah permalink
    August 30, 2010 1:07 pm

    Wow. It’s quite alarming how bitter some people are when it comes to anyone making a success of themselves. I don’t hear anyone having a go at stephenie meyer who openly admits to have written her books around shakespeare plays. Is that not plagiarism? Why is it so hard for some people to believe that JK Rowling is just an exceptionally talented writer. And to the person who didn’t seem to think Christopher Little does interviews, you should maybe do some research, because only the other week i watched a JK ROwling interview and there he was.
    At the end of the day we are never going to know if she really did steal the idea for the goblet of fire, but isn’t it odd that it has been in publication for many years and it is only now that we are hearing about this other book? Why not bring it up when it was first published?
    The harry potter books have been big since they were first published, its not like it was the goblet of fire that first kicked off the hype around it. And there is no way on earth that it was all some grand scheme from the beginning, because there is no way to do that. If it were possible then surely there would be millions of writers as big as Jk Rowling. Or at least Christopher Little would have more.

    • September 25, 2011 2:00 am

      JK Rowling is a talented writer. Meyer mentioned Shakespeare’s plays in her books; that isn’t plagiarism. It’s called getting insipred, idiot.

  17. John Sheehan permalink
    September 17, 2010 8:07 pm

    First of all, what is not commonly known is that the Willy the Wizard people have spent seven long years and got themselves into a helluva lot of debt in bringing this to court. Doesn’t that tell you something right there? Doesn’t that tell you they must surely have seriously sound evidence against the woman and her partner Little? As for Little being conspicuous put forward here by one of his supporters calling himself/herself “Sarah.” When was the last time any of you saw Little on television? How many times before that? And who are the hacks who scribble in his den?

    He stays in the shadows so that his great ‘discovery’ can have all the limelight we are told to believe. For thirteen years!!!! Come on! Reader, you cannot be that dumb. These people are avoiding scrutiny and have been doing so since day one. Can there be anything more obvious?

    None of them invented the story. None of them could. They are stupid, greedy people. They stole it, hook, line and sinker and got a woman who never had a damn thing publshed before that to front their planned sortie into the publishing houses of the world. What you are looking at folks is probably the greatest rip-off in literary history and will be remembered as such. Gaiman, Stouffer, Lewis, Tolkien, Eco and I suspect many more, not to mention videos of famous films have all been ripped off to fill up the camouflage. That is the truth of the matter. Don’t buy into this “poor Joanne,” preyed upon by them, nasty jealousy-driven males”, drivel. That is not what is going on.

    It is reasonable to assume that people who could throw some light on some of the above or all of it have been well bought off. Sooner or later one of them will come forward. The rest are prepared to go to the stake “for queen and country” and their slice of the cake, of course. Or perhaps they are scared of disappointing all those mums and dads who have bought into the Harry Potter nonsense. Whatever the reason, there are none so silent as those who have been paid to shut up, however you look at it. If you want to believe the rationed claptrap about Rowling dished out to you by her PR people some of whom are on this blog, go for it. My advice is to start asking some simple questions and then see if you can find answers. See if you can find out the exact dates Rowling worked in Amnesty and what explanation she offered for leaving “the best job I ever had”. Start there! If you get an answer do get back to me.

  18. Jane Marie permalink
    September 22, 2010 1:15 pm

    I am with you John.
    Because all this story is releated to the late Adrian Jacobs, I just want to make a little homage to him from this lines.
    In 1978 and 1979 I lived with Mr Jacobs and family, then I was 22 years old. He was a so fantastic man, an original in every way and a very good person endeed. He was very rich once, because he was a very clever business man, but for what I got to know about him, it seemed to me he was to much generous in every way towards others, so I can imagine that later after he could not manage his finanaces by himself for obvious reasons releated to his bad health, others around may have taken advantage of it.
    Mr Jacobs always have had people invited to share his home in Cavendish Avenue, St Johns Wood in London and some other writters they have had his favour in allowing them to do their job as writters in some of the rooms of his house.

    Adrian Jacobs has been in my mind always through my life, not only because he was honorable, genuine, good and an intelligent man, but also because I never forgot all the windsom of his words. You could go with him very deep in any kind of talking about any subject…and that is marvellous.
    He was to me in those two years as the father I nerver had before…and endeed many people belived that I was his daughter, because he treat me in that way.
    My thoughts are with him wherever his soul is now. I wish justice may be done…but with my experience in life, which is very much endeed, although I am only 55 years old, I learned enough that, in many cases, that very much money can buy it all.

    I enjoyed to read your posts, but do not be naif and innocent and do not be part of the flock.
    Adrian Jacobs WAS AN ORIGINAL IN EVERYTHING HE DID…AND HIS STORY WAS TOO. HE IS THE ORIGINAL ONE.
    ONES HAVE THE IDEAS, AND OTHERS LIVE FROM THEM…and this fact is old as the earth. The same is happen with so many inventions and patents.
    Love for all.
    Jane Marie. London.

  19. Hannah Hardisty permalink
    March 15, 2011 5:14 pm

    what the heck?! maybe she just had the same idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  20. Merikh Moonskind permalink
    June 27, 2011 5:49 am

    im a young american reader (in my teenage years at 15) and rowling was the reason i started reading. i have torn up many of her books (i apologize) but dont get mad at me yet! i read them so much, they have fallen apart! if ever there was a series, or even a 37 page book that carried what rowling has, i have yet to find it. people will attemt to cash in on whatever they can. i have been constantly told that rowling “Stole her ‘idea'” by people that know nothing about the facts. this has opened my eyes and i find no WAY that she could be persecuted.

  21. honestyisbest permalink
    July 5, 2011 1:11 am

    Just how many of the commentators here are among Rowling’s professional stormbloggers? Her PR firm are known to police the net to counteract anything untoward or ‘dangerous’ said about their ‘client’. As for you Chauncey you cannot seriously give off about the lies told to you about Rowling’s ‘poverty’ and all that nonsense and then wax lyrical about ‘her’ books. How do you know she even wrote them? Or have you bought into that guff too about “an idea on a train” like all the rest? Maybe, you have decided that bit is true? Where do you draw the line? “I have never been sceptical about her talent or achievement”, says you. You are a journalist. It is your JOB to be skeptical and find out the truth. Why don’t you find out what other lies you have been spun? Or aren’t there any? It will be interesting indeed to see what the judge accepts to be lies and what not when the case for plagiarism goes to trial in London’s High Court in February next year. It is thought incidentally to be one of the biggest cases of its kind ever. Of course, the press in the grip of Rowling’s myth makers won’t let you know that. Money involved, you see. Tons of it. Indeed, what any of you ‘know’ about Rowling (and I use that word very loosely), is what her PR boys have told you. If you know anything else besides what they have told you,tell me, so that I too may come to worship.

    • Chauncey Mabe permalink*
      July 16, 2011 1:53 am

      Some people seem to have watched too many episodes of the X-Files. Why question whether Rowling wrote her books? Why not question, oh, I don’t know: Hemingway, or Amis, or C.S. Lewis, or Margaret Mitchell, or Joyce Carol Oates, or Douglas Adams, or Robert Heinlein, or …. There’s a distinct odor of derangement in the air. This is not Watergate, you know.

      Oh, but if agents and publishers and PR people are so all powerful, then how is it that so many fraudulent writers, from James Frey to Nasdijj to J.T. Leroy to Forrest Carter to Herman Rosenblatt to Norma Khouri to Misha Defonseca to Anthony Godby Johnson to Lauren Stratford to Clifford Irving to many others. Almost all were exposed in short order. I assure of two things: Rowling and her publisher may be swimming in money, but none of it trickles down to lowly reporters and book reviewers; and 2) if Rowling did not write her books, then some enterprising reporter would have gotten the truth by now. Heck, the News of the World would have hacked her cell phone to get it!

  22. petRA permalink
    July 16, 2011 2:55 pm

    you are the best!!! write another book in the form of something like harry please:)

    • December 18, 2011 11:55 pm

      You can download the SOURCE called Travels with Li Po at http://www,bogsideartists.com. Go to shop link or Kagi. Used to be free once upon a time but the nominal fee covers postage and not much else. For the doomed-by-history derivative, Harry Potter, you will have to go to the thief Rowling I’m afraid. Good luck.

  23. whooonoos permalink
    July 24, 2011 1:53 am

    You have a point Chauncey but Hemingway and the rest so far as I know were not pursued for years by people claiming he had ripped them off. That’s the difference. Hemingway was his style of writing as well and like the rest from Tolstoy to Dickens etc you can easily equate the style with the man and the reach of his intellect. Rowling is so out of whack in that regard that the clever students at Harvard could not believe that somebody so shallow could have penned the stuff they admired so much. You will find out their views on the net.

    Rowling has written what is essentially a religious epic and there is nothing in her past up until the age of 29 when she got the first Potter book published to substantiate her desire, need, ability or even inclination to write anything of the sort. She didn’t even have a brother. She first went to church for the very first time at the age of fourteen because “religion was never talked about in our house”. How many times after that? She omits to mention. The whole myth reeks of grand deception. How did she manage to get away with it? is the real question. Pointless drawing our attention to the fact that she did. We know she did and some of us even know how.

    The question is answered when you look at WHO is supporting her. She is protected by politicians, most notably Gordon Brown after whom she named her son David “Gordon”. She is bosom friends with both him and his wife Sarah. Maybe that goes some way to answering your question. She has friends in high places and is said to have very close friends in the internal security organization known as MI6. Check those out if you get a minute! Her links to leading members of Britain’s Freemasons I also leave you to discover. Gordon Brown is a Grand Wizard in that outfit and you would be slow indeed if you did not discern the plethora of Masonic symbolism in the Potter series. The party after the premiere of the first Deathly Hallows took place at the Masonic Hall in Covent Garden, London.

    Rowling’s money you claim does not “trickle down to lowly reporters and book reviewers”. How do you KNOW Chauncey? It is the UK we are talking about not Canada! Or is bribery in the media what you consider a paranoid delusion when parliamentarians were found to be taking bribes for asking questions not so long ago in the House of Commons itself! You don’t know who is on her payroll and who is not, and if you are waiting for any of them to tell you, you will never know. Neil Gaiman from whom she is said to have taken the physical attributes of her boy wizard was said to have been paid off by her. He denies it of course. What would you do?

    ‘Queen and Country and all that, old boy! Not in the public’s interest to have our icon unmasked… not until we have no further use for her, at any rate. The Brits are like that. The press is controlled from on high and always has been to the extent that a British Watergate is a virtual impossibility in the UK. Princess Diana’s affairs were successfully hushed up for years even after her divorce from Charles. That she indulged in cocaine was also hushed up so that even today nobody can believe it when you tell them. I could go on with reference to their other idols like Churchill, Mountbatten, Philip etc. But what is the point? People tend to guard their delusions to the bitter end.

    The Prime Minister of Britain by the way can stifle all reports in the papers not supportive of a certain public figure such as Rowling by issuing a legal threat called a PI (public interest notice) that is totally binding. MIght that explain why we know nothing at all about Rowling except what we have been told by her PR boys and her friends in the media?

    Rowling’s money does “trickle”, if that is the right word, down to Schillings, the most notorious law firm on the planet who represent her as well as many known criminals, and to a PR outfit that polices blogs like this in order to paste supportive comments and present bogus arguments in her favour. These are facts.

    Schillings have effectively gagged the UK press by injunctions etc not to publish a single unfavourable remark about their client Rowling. Fact. I can send you one of their injunctions if you like. Nothing short of adulation has been permitted for the last fifteen years as the myth of the literary icon was being pieced together in the back rooms of Little’s agency. You are right indeed about hacking and unscrupulous reporters etc getting at the truth and I have no doubt whatsoever one or two of them have. But you would have to be a brave man indeed to front up to certain financial ruin by Schillings, the judicial wrath of the Home Office and the opprobrium of millions of kids who have been persuaded, just like you Chauncey, that their idol is sqeakey clean if not actually a living saint. A saint indeed, who had no qualms dumping the man who made her what she isn’t, Christopher Little. A man in ill health, let it be said, who declared himself “devastated’ by the callous and brutal way she severed him out of her life.

    You say you would “love to have the devotion of millions of kids around the world”. If I am paranoid, which I am not except under certain circumstances just like you Chauncey and everybody else, I am blessed indeed in comparison to megalomania. Nobody in their right mind would want the devotion of millions of kids around the world unless he be Pope, if only because the penalty for playing God iin this life is very probably crucifixion in the next. You will be around Chauncey to see the big leaky ship HMS Potter slip beneath the waves because it has been announced that the Willy the Wizard team and not giving up. Good luck to them, say I!

  24. Gordon Hall permalink
    December 2, 2011 5:19 am

    i think she stole the idea and should pay about a mil

  25. sam permalink
    December 17, 2012 4:56 am

    J.k. Rowling stole her idea from an older couple. I have a book, its very small, but the cover says something like “Harry Potter and the time traveling machine” or “Harry Potter and something” I can’t completely recall because I was about 12 when I found the book on a tiny bookshelf in a tiny building in a campground in Normandy Tennessee, there is a lake and such things around it. Anyway, I had always been a big book worm so when I found the book, I was a bit shocked that it said “Harry Potter” on it and was written by a different author. It had the same story line, a boy with his crappy relatives, when a man appears and something extraordinary happens. I never got to read it, because I showed my aunt and she locked it into her lockbox where its been to this day, along with a Charlie Brown Valentines day book that my cousin found at the same place as where I found the harry potter book. In fact, should you reply to this I will call my aunt tomorrow and see if she still has the book. I will then give you all the information I can find.

  26. Jimbo Slice permalink
    March 7, 2013 12:49 am

    Have you read all those books tied with the Potter series? Wizard’s Hall closely resembles the Potter stories. of course id never say she plagiarized just look at the books and make your own choice. Id bet she read the book once and it made it self into something amazing and original. I wish people would write more books like these.

  27. Rich permalink
    February 25, 2014 7:06 am

    How many people understand that Jk’s agent was the agent of Willy the Wizard as well…ohhhhh not so prissy pure anymore are we?

Trackbacks

  1. Дэниел Рэдклифф Станет Писателем? - Hot Перчик
  2. J.K. Rowling’s Plagarism of Harry Potter « The New World Ahead

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers

%d bloggers like this: