“…while Radcliffe and Watson may have distanced themselves from Rowling, they have yet to distance themselves from the wizarding world she invented as a broke single mother surviving, sometimes, on a biscuit a night.”
thetimes.co.uk/article/why-th…
@RadfemBlack so...as it happens, the Sunday Times published some sort of hagiography on @jk_rowling—application of massive jolts of electricity to the fibrillating heart of the Harry Potter media empire. some fellow mediocrity, @leafarbuthnot, wrote it. https://t.co/dY3PazxtQN ~Chara
archive.is/qYzBS
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot well, *maybe* @leafarbuthnot wrote it. these people do tend to delegate a lot of their little jobs to _paid help_. including their own writing. ghostwriters do brisk business for a *reason*. but I digress. @jk_rowling and her fanatical fan base miss a point about her. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot it's a vital point in *honest* discussion of the decline and fall of @jk_rowling. her career is dead, it's not getting up again, no matter how much PR material @jk_rowling (or her agents, rather) plants in the sycophantic U.K. press. the U.K. press share in her bıgotry. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @jk_rowling's transphobic bıgotry is _manifest_. right now it's the most important fact about @jk_rowling's celebrity: she's a professional bıgot now. she's not a writer—that's one curious aspect about her career as a propagandist for the absurd "gender critical" cause. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @jk_rowling is a "writer" we're told—yet she doesn't write her own agitprop. @Docstockk and @bindelj and @AbigailShrier and all the other celebrity enforcers of "biological sex" (i.e. total and complete division of humanity by genital shape) do all of *that* writing. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier and that right is a salient _clue_. the most important fact about @jk_rowling isn't that she's a famous bıgot. bıgotry is a small and mean thing; only bıgots think they deserve to be famous for such a thing. the most important truth is...@jk_rowling is not a writer. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier she can't even write memorably on her *favorite subject*, i.e. her opinions about human genitalia. she tried, and her contribution was forgotten in a week. it's @bindelj, @BretWeinstein's wife, @helenstaniland, et alii who have to do the heavy lifting. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland because @jk_rowling can't write. simple as that. she can fill massive tomes full of words but _typing_ isn't the same as writing. she could steal important pieces of Jill Murphy's "The Worst Witch" and Neil Gaiman's "The Books of Magic" to spice her typing up. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland she can lard her blocks of formless typing with bits and pieces of quirkiness to keep it from being *completely* boring—like putting sultanas into an otherwise bland blob of porridge. (she also spiced her work with various petty bıgotries and anti-Semitic stereotypes.) ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland this activity of @jk_rowling's *resembles* writing. it fooled someone at @Scholastic (or maybe someone at @Scholastic got a bribe)—they gave @jk_rowling a truly gigantic rollout. @Scholastic sold her rubbish to every schoolchild as an antidote to not wanting to read. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic that's a key to understanding the @jk_rowling cult too: just as her books weren't really *writing*, her fans weren't really _readers_. her fans don't care about literature, they care about @jk_rowling and her nauseating, completely *synthetic* corporate media celebrity. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic @jk_rowling is "great" to them not for her typing, but because Harry Potter was in a lot of movies, and you can get toys and things. her success was never _literary_. it was *commerce*. @jk_rowling extruded seven thudding bricks of "content", like bales of straw. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic and @Scholastic willingly *corrupted* themselves on @jk_rowling's behalf. they gleefully peddled the lie that this plagiaristic, unimaginative, thoroughly _mediocre_ typist of imitative fantasies was a "modern classic". it sure made them a lot of money. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic writers of true ability all see clear through @jk_rowling and out the other side. Ursula K. LeGuin roasted Rowling's tenth-rate scribbling. Neil Gaiman, of course, long knew that JKR had *stolen* from him. Alan Moore grasped that Harry Potter was just warmed-over Jesus. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic her *very first book* betrayed her total ignorance of the sort of creative and mythological forces @jk_rowling was pretending she was at home with. she reduced the Philosopher's Stone to a joke. @jk_rowling simply *is not a writer*. she's a corporate counterfeit writer. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic and _that_, right there, is why @jk_rowling deserves "cancellation". because "cancellation" means nothing other than...she can't be famous any more. that's not a _right_. it's not a "free speech" issue—@jk_rowling's sort of speech is bought and paid for, not "free". ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic there's no moral obligation to be found here that any human being is bound to respect. @jk_rowling is not *owed* fame. @Scholastic blundered by even accepting her manuscripts—she never deserved the contract. they were willing to *ignore* her plagiarism. for _money_. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic the fact that she's a bıgot obsessed with policing of human genitalia is just *icing*. it's a distraction. @jk_rowling might even regret having gone down that path but she's committed now—if she admitted to weakness her fanbase would rip her to pieces, and she knows it. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic her writing isn't going to make her famous—I think she kind of knows that. she's got *notoriety*, but that's not good for the long term. the "gender critical" neo-fascıst cause has been her *only lifeline* to continued fame. it's either penis policing, or nothing. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic I disbelieve the fish-stories about her grinding poverty. even if they're true they don't matter. she could have taken all her ill-gotten money and disappeared into her little colonial outpost in Scotland (which nation does *not* want @jk_rowling there) and said nothing. ~Chara
@RadfemBlack @jk_rowling @leafarbuthnot @Docstockk @bindelj @AbigailShrier @BretWeinstein @helenstaniland @Scholastic but she wanted to *stay famous*, did Mx. Jo Rowling. she thought she _deserved_ eternal limelight. I regret to inform @jk_rowling that her fame is assured. or rather her infamy. remember...fame only lasts fifteen minutes. infamy is forever. ~Mx. Chara Dreemurr of Pnictogen
