In wishing that JKRowling would shut the fuck about her new novel?

[ExitPursuedByABear]

For days now the media has been awash with interviews about her new 'adult' book. Every time I turn on the radio or the tv, there she is, giving another bloody interview. She has said she thought about publishing it under a pseudonym but decided to go public. You know what JKR, anonymous would have been a good idea.

I mean, the Harry Potter books are a good yarn but hardly great literature so I am not exactly champing at the bit to get my teeth into her 'adult' offering.

And apparently it contains swearing .

She has called her fictional middle class village with the adjacent sink estate Pagford.

She's an author promoting her latest book: I don't get the problem. Anyone with a name does a big round of publicity. By all means criticise the press for overdoing it...

She's one of life's better people, even if she isn't a literary genius. There aren't that many super-wealthy people speaking out about tax obligations. She does a lot of charity stuff on the quiet, as well as the better known works. Good on her.

Yes YABU. She'd be an idiot not to promote her book as much as possible.

But I sort of agree with you, I'm fed up of hearing about it too (I listen to R4 too much too) and nothing I've heard about it makes me remotely interested in buying it.

Quint Thanks for picking up on the Pagford mention.

It has been amusing me for days.

Mumsnet is my place of choice for amending my entrenched attitudes

YABU this is part of the job of being a writer. The publisher gives you an advance (if you are JKR) and pays a percentage, in return you write the book and do publicity for it.
For JKR its bound to be a big splash and on all the news channels etc. for a lot of minor writer's it is visits to schools/bookshops etc.

I have read the review in the Guardian.

Before HP came along, children were hardly reading and she changed all of that. She deserves plaudits for that at least.

JK Rowling really dislikes doing publicity. Even with the early Harry Potter books it was really difficult to get an interview (I know, I tried.). She is doing this now as part of her contractual obligations. She moved publisher from Bloomsbury and got a (naturally) big advance, and doing publicity now is just a big a part of her job as delivering the book. The secrecy issues were just the same with the Harry Potters and were in place to stop any content leaking. The books will have been under locked security at the printers, and it will have been a total secret at Little, Brown with likely only her editor and a couple of other people seeing the manuscript. No proofs were issued, and bookshops and shippers have had to sign strict embargo letters. It's normal practice for a book this big nowadays.
JK Rowling completely changed the book world, and made children's publishing a genre that actually made money. She therefore funded commissions and advances for other fabulous authors who would otherwise probably never have been published. She gets nothing but praise from me.

YABU
I haven't seen ANYTHING.
and ditto what hully says

I am rolling in the aisles at the assumption that "before HP, children didn't read" - I guess I must be really middle-class to think that children did in fact know how to use a book!

OP, YANBU, she is a self-serving cunt and the very epitome of what a champagne socialist is. Her entrenched views upon "the middle classes" and "middle england" are exactly what she claims to be campaigning against (i.e., a narrow-minded view itself). She normally demands the freedom to enjoy a private life, and yet here she is courting anyone who'll listen.

She will be doing what her publisher has set up for her. The embargo, etc, will be what the publicists and marketing teams want.

I do NOT share her political views but give her a break. She does a lot for charity.

She pays her taxes in a warped world where that is something to be laughed at by the uber-rich. She can be as much of a champagne socialist as she bloody well likes.

She's pretty horrid in RL.

I like her, I don't like the stupid top secret hype.

She normally demands the freedom to enjoy a private life, and yet here she is courting anyone who'll listen.
Of course she's entitled, and should expect to be able, to keep her private life private. There's a world of difference between talking about your book in interviews and actively courting the kind of publicity which some 'celebrities' seem to relish, eg. talking about your marriage, children, drink problem, etc., to anyone who'll listen.

Disclaimer - I don't dislike JKR. I like her. I really enjoyed the Harry Potter books.

I have just been a bit suprised at the hype around her new offering.

I agree, I suppose it is not her fault that everyone wanted to hang on to her coat tails. to me it would have been more in keeping if she had chosen to publish under a psuedonym.

I would rather have a 'champagne socialist' than a 'champagne Tory capitalist' who would no doubt be stashing their money into offshore accounts and living in tax exile by now, while paying their minions national minimum wage. What's wrong with being rich and socialist? If only there were more like her.

I wouldn't touch Harry Potter with a bargepole, but watching her Harvard commencement speech, the very last thing on my mind was wishing she'd stop speaking.

Thanks for the link comfy - will listen later.

Wasn't the thing with the HP phenomenon that the books had got kids who don't normally take to reading, to, um, take to reading?
(I could have put that better.)
It was quite a while ago now, I can't really remember, but I worked with a lot of MC people who scoffed at her, whilst silently thinking 'you haven't a clue, for some of those kids this lightweight derivative bit of shit writing is their way into your world' and then I ate my gravel for lunch.

Is it a bit like the way 50 Shades has got lots of adults reading who wouldn't normally pick up a book?

I think she comes across well in interviews. She turned her life around, seems a decent enough person and uses her fame/fortune for the greater good.

Doesn't change the fact she's not a very good writer though. There's a reason why she got turned down so many times. I imagine she takes a LOT of editing.

My oldest children were, I think, about late primary and early secondary school age when the HP books came out, and I can remember before that, just how difficult it was to find decent books for them.

The trend was towards 'realistic stories' with plenty of angst and heartbreak, which both my children hated. They wanted adventure books with decent heroes, not family break-ups and going into care stories. Enid Blyton stuff, which would have ticked those boxes, was considered too old-fashioned (neither their schools nor the local libraries stocked them) and so they ended up with bookcases full of Point Horror, Goosebumps and the neverending Star Wars series, with very little else. And I'm a parent who loves buying books.

When the first Harry Potter book came out, my children devoured it, and discussed the possibilities of it endlessly. Our first copy is almost in pieces because it was loved by them and reread so often.

Now, my youngest son (9) has a huge, varied collection of books, a good part of which is because HP's success made writing and publishing good quality children's books financially viable.

Of course children read before Harry Potter don't be daft people just meant she captured childrens imaginations with Harry Potter , not all children read the Tempest before they are 8

I have glanced through the HP books because DD was obsessed, they are really badly written. I don't think they would have been as successful as they were if it wasn't for the films.