Here is a funny post the edgelord’s retweeted, an AI generated image of the dearly departed in heaven: https://x.com/eternalebionite/status/1966240805666042261
“Killing Hitler is wrong.” - Hitler (hypocrite)
I can’t imagine ever being on a trajectory like Rowling, she was living the liberal dream, she wrote a series of mediocre children’s books and became a billionaire, she could literally spend her time doing anything, and she chooses to spend it arguing on twitter about how Hitler wasn’t that bad and his enemies were worse (presumably because she includes “trans people” in the list of Hitler’s enemies).
How did it go so wrong for her? This is the sort of shit I would expect of someone who dropped out of uni to sit in their room at their parent’s house and play COD and those creepy anime gatcha games all day, not someone who actually accomplished something and could solve every single problem she has easily, hell, she could hire people to solve all her problems for her.
I keep seeing people talk about her “exceptional talent” (it’s a shame she sucks because she’s so talented!!!) and I’m just like… You have literally never read any other literature, have you? I get the appeal of HP and that you love it but the writing is, just, fine. At best, it’s… Fine. It’s written for kids and it reads that way. She composes competent prose and came up with a passably engaging but not particularly novel story. It’s more fun to read than say an article in an academic journal but most things are.
I am once again begging liberals to read another book.
Also it’s a series of novels that make no sense if you look hard at it (e.g. time turners) and condone slavery, fat-shame a child, have names for minorities that are Hitlerian in their level of racism, and on and on . . .
Oh, absolutely. I have a mile high stack of problems with the books but I think I only ever read the first one (I’m about 5 or 6 years too old for it) and I just saw someone talking about her “talent” recently
That’s kind of the thing, though. It’s hard to thread the needle and produce something that’s just mediocre enough to have mass appeal while still not being completely terrible, and the people who do largely do it by accident because they’re fuzzy on what people actually find appealing about their work. A Wizard of Earthsea is a way better book than Harry Potter and it’s not like Ursula K. LeGuin didn’t earn respect and acclaim in her lifetime, but it didn’t lead to a generational media juggernaut because it’s not merchandisable. JKR is exceptionally unexceptional and that’s exactly why she spends her time having twitter fights instead of breeding dancing llamas or winning krav maga tournaments.
That’s an interesting point. I’ve recently been reading “the dispossessed” (nearly done!) and it’s a reminder that damn, le Guin really was a great writer.
I still choose to believe she is sentient mold wearing a skinsuit
Two things I think explain JKR, first is just the social media rot. Basicaly I do agree in some way that humans have not particularly evolved to handle social media at this scale. It takes a lot of effort to handle being famous, unironicaly between the love and hate, not attaching yourself too much to either side, not letting the reception of the work define your personality too much etc. But that is just one side.
You’re hunter gatherer, you say something stupid you get hit in the face, you’re living in ancient civilization or whatever 5000 years ago you say something stupid maybe you get on top on a bucket and shout, maybe 20 people hear you call you names and throw a rotten fruit on your face as you run away. Today you get on your soap box, say stupid shit and instead get anything from 2k to 2million reply guys saying “yes boss”, “totaly correct sir” etc and the hate you’re supposed to endure or force you to reconsider, you can selectively block away.
IMO If people in the ancient world could get on a soap box and speak for the entire city of e.g Rome at once and not get a single reply that makes them uncomfortable enough to self reflect then we clearly wouldn’t be here as a civilization today, shit would have burned down thousands of years ago.
Second if you look seriously deeper this is a problem with “success” for a lot of artists/creators. They get rich and famous, they’ve created The Thing and then they have this void. Some turn to drugs, others to gambling while others just have a “normal” life. I think the most stable group tend to be the ones who still manage to fullfill themselves with their work. JKR clearly doesn’t get much out of working anymore imo so social media drama-attention farming is all she has left in her pitiful life.
I once had a shower thought of “What if there was a Slytherin whose defining trait of ambition manifested not as wizard Nazi shit, but as a penchant for wildly overscoped Zybourne Clock-style projects” and I think that was more thought than JKR ever put into her worldbuilding
Even not counting all the bigotry, why are people like her and Muskrat spending so much time on fucking Twitter of all things? If I had that much money, I’d be doing anything else.
I hate the reduction of fascism to “restrictions of freedom of speech”
Or “violence”
It’s so fucking stupid. I hate this political & economic system. Everyone is so uneducated about literally everything to do with politics.
The chessboard-shitting pigeons and their “if you resort to any sort of violence for any reason whatsoever you’re a fascist” are the bane of progress.
that’s not even their argument though. that’s what they say, but what they mean is more like “if you resort to any sort of violence (beyond what the liberal state is already doing) for any reason whatsoever you’re a fascist”
Notice Rowling refuses to condone killing Hitler, while being happy to use the label of terrorist (which gets people summarily executed) to talk about people who do condone killing Hitler.
That’s why in her newer movies they try to save hitler
So uh… JK just knew an appropriate quote from mein kampf off the top of her head?
If you believe free speech is shared equally by all regardless of political position, you are tenaciously ignorant.
If you don’t understand that emotional factors shape people’s beliefs more than hard evidence, you have outdated ideas about psychology.
If you believe the state does not punish people with views it characterizes as transgressive, you are naive.
If you believe that most governments today do not inflict violence and death upon their ideological opponents, you are complicit.
Voldermort, famously, was judged by a jury of peers.
3 out of 4 ain’t bad
