JKR "excluded" from Jubilee reading list

[ResisterRex]

Story originally in the Sunday Times but also picked up by the Telegraph.

Sunday Times:

The Big Jubilee Read — 70 books fit for Queen and country

"However, the most conspicuous absentee is JK Rowling — arguably the most successful British novelist of the past two decades.

“There was a big discussion about JK Rowling,” said Susheila Nasta, emeritus professor of modern literature at Queen Mary and Westfield University. “She was on the long-list with Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. A space was cleared for someone equally as good but whose work was not as well known. There were some very tricky decisions.”"

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/344f3d9e-bdbd-11ec-b03a-035ba70491ca?shareToken=4bcae05ee43c246590f27c816ac9420c

Telegraph:

JK Rowling excluded from Platinum Jubilee list of great reads in wake of transgender row

"Palace aides declined to comment."

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/17/jk-rowling-excluded-platinum-jubilee-list-great-reads-wake-transgender/

I'm not surprised she's not on the list. As someone else mentioned, it tends to be more literary stuff.
But a big lol at those couple of posts adamant that she's not a good writer.
Yup. Bill Gates has no real talent for computers, Carl Sagan didn't know much about science, Hilary Clinton knows nothing about politics and JK Rowling can't write. It was nothing but luck they all made it as far as they did.

That always bemuses me too. It's not for me, I like my wizards, dragons etc a bit more Hobb. But she has sold a gazillion books in so many different languages it seems more than churlish, more deluded, to say she is a crap writer.

Jesus look at this tit 👀

It's all about the lip gloss doncha know.

I don't really think JKR's books, including her adult ones, fit on that list really. And there are better/more important authors who are also not there.

It's a short list, all things considered.

I love JK and all she does but HP is a pretty dire book, it's popular yes, but look at the list of masterpieces - what would you swap out for a poplar kids book?

@SamphirethePogoingStickerist

That always bemuses me too. It's not for me, I like my wizards, dragons etc a bit more Hobb. But she has sold a gazillion books in so many different languages it seems more than churlish, more deluded, to say she is a crap writer.

I really think it depends what you mean.

A successful writer is not necessarily a good writer, there are scads of terrible writers that are commercially sucessful.

I wouldn't put JKR in the category of terrible writers, but she is also not at the level of good literary fiction. (Albeit there is a shit-ton of bad literary fiction these days and I'd take her solid pop fiction over that crap any day.) I don't think she considers herself that kind of writer anyway.

Roald Dahl, a true master of story telling isn't even on the list!
So glad Marlon James made it on :)

Terry Pratchett, Judith Kerr, Enid Blyton and Elisabeth Beresford all need to be on that list. Also, Michael Bond.

@Ides

Dear lord, JK Rowling isn't a great author. I'm sorry, but she just isn't. She's just been lucky enough to hit on a theme that wowed film-makers. She just made the mistake of getting herself embroiled in the GC/trans rights debate, rapidly found herself out of her depth, but had no choice but to continue. I get that she's a darling of that weird alliance of right wing women and full-on misandrist radical feminists ... but she really, really isn't much good as an author.

She's great at applying make up (full marks for the lip-gloss, especially), and she's made lots of money as a result of her books chiming superbly with what the film industry wanted at a particular time. But that's it. She's not a great author and even less of a thinker. Time to get over it and move on. Most of all: stop quoting her in relation to the GC/trans-rights debate. It's embarrassing.

To quote someone who's a celebrated writer from both the UK and the Commonwealth - although he probably wouldn't claim either "identity" today:

"O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion..."

Posting performative misogynist nonsense on a feminist forum might very well be considered a "foolish notion".

All that aside - and knowing that this list has come about from a poll of personal opinions - I'm surprised that Tsitsi Dangaremba's Nervous Conditions didn't make the cut. It was once listed in the top 100 contemporary books shaping the world and it certainly has a lot to say about both the UK and "empire" and after. There doesn't seem to be any selection published in 1988, or any from Zimbabwe.

I'd also have loved to see, out of the four works from Canada, some native literature - as there are quite a few brilliant choices.

I'd also have loved to see, out of the four works from Canada, some native literature - as there are quite a few brilliant choices.

What would you think? I'd love to see The Handmaid's Tale replaced, just because I can't stand MA as a writer, though really I guess I can't argue she's not influential. I was thinking Margaret Lawrence, myself.

A successful writer is not necessarily a good writer, there are scads of terrible writers that are commercially sucessful.

And as many good writers who don't get published.

It's not simply writing style, punctuation, grammar, that makes a good writer. See Stephen King. But to be so flippantly derisory about a writer with sales on Rowling's scale tells me more about that particular poster than they maybe expected to reveal.

Just read the list. JKR wouldn’t fit on there. It’s a commonwealth centric list of serious literature. I have nothing against Harry Potter but it wouldn’t sit right on this list at all.

Sorry @mangyinseam, I meant it finish with...

And I do agree that she is not a great 'literary' writer. And I don't think her not being in this list is at all odd or would worry her. It's not a list I would anticipate her to be on.

Sometimes I wonder who hates her more. The men who want to remove women's spaces and rights or the people who have been silenced by them or say The Right Things for fear of being bullied or, well, not getting acting roles.

She has such strength and it is clear she is not going to pretend to change her (perfectly reasonable) views.

When all this comes crashing down.
And it will.
So many of those who criticised her will be lining up to say how much they secretly supported her. 🙄

I just wish people would read what she actually wrote before joining the calls to have her stoned to death.
It's almost like they know that she is right 🤔

I think Doris Lessing should have been on the list. Also Ken Saro-Wiwa.

@Ides

Dear lord, JK Rowling isn't a great author. I'm sorry, but she just isn't. She's just been lucky enough to hit on a theme that wowed film-makers. She just made the mistake of getting herself embroiled in the GC/trans rights debate, rapidly found herself out of her depth, but had no choice but to continue. I get that she's a darling of that weird alliance of right wing women and full-on misandrist radical feminists ... but she really, really isn't much good as an author.

She's great at applying make up (full marks for the lip-gloss, especially), and she's made lots of money as a result of her books chiming superbly with what the film industry wanted at a particular time. But that's it. She's not a great author and even less of a thinker. Time to get over it and move on. Most of all: stop quoting her in relation to the GC/trans-rights debate. It's embarrassing.

Gosh, what a bitter and jealous person you are!!

I agree that JKR isn't an obvious choice for this kind of list. There is a huge number of outstanding Commonwealth writers and it must have been hard deciding who to include and who to leave off.

I am surprised that Lessing isn't on there, as she is such a major writer. But perhaps they decided that one white African writer on the list was enough.

@Ides

Dear lord, JK Rowling isn't a great author. I'm sorry, but she just isn't. She's just been lucky enough to hit on a theme that wowed film-makers. She just made the mistake of getting herself embroiled in the GC/trans rights debate, rapidly found herself out of her depth, but had no choice but to continue. I get that she's a darling of that weird alliance of right wing women and full-on misandrist radical feminists ... but she really, really isn't much good as an author.

She's great at applying make up (full marks for the lip-gloss, especially), and she's made lots of money as a result of her books chiming superbly with what the film industry wanted at a particular time. But that's it. She's not a great author and even less of a thinker. Time to get over it and move on. Most of all: stop quoting her in relation to the GC/trans-rights debate. It's embarrassing.

Pahaha Yer sausage

The purpose of lists like this often seems to be to generate discussion. Here they have obviously decided to include lots of Commonwealth authors, which is great. Also there really aren’t any children’s books there. Book Thief is YA. I can’t bear its arch tone myself and I wouldn’t have put it in. But I don’t think there’s anything to be concluded about the omission of JKR. That said, she’s probably done more than any other children’s author in the last 30 years to raise the profile of children’s books and get children reading. So it always amuses me to hear people say that of course she’s really a bad writer.

@KimikosNightmare

I think Tolkien is a far more odd omission than JK Rowling

Missing out Ian McEwan and Atonement is weird too. It was published in 2001 and was overlooked for The Life of Pi fgs as is including Keri Hulme's The Bone People

And whilst I don't like him Irvine Welsh is surely a better choice for 1993 than Carol Shield's The Stone Diaries

The first Harry Potter was published in 1997. The 1997 book is Arundhati Roy's The God of Small Things . In the context of this list Roy's book is a much better choice.

I think Harry Potters are good books but if I had to choose either a HP or god of small things for a great books list I wouldn’t stop to blink. That is a masterpiece.

@KimikosNightmare

I think Tolkien is a far more odd omission than JK Rowling

Missing out Ian McEwan and Atonement is weird too. It was published in 2001 and was overlooked for The Life of Pi fgs as is including Keri Hulme's The Bone People

And whilst I don't like him Irvine Welsh is surely a better choice for 1993 than Carol Shield's The Stone Diaries

The first Harry Potter was published in 1997. The 1997 book is Arundhati Roy's The God of Small Things . In the context of this list Roy's book is a much better choice.

As I understood it, there are ten books for every decade but that doesn't mean there is one book allocated to each year within that decade.

I may be wrong on that point, though. If you have other information, fine.

I really don't mind JKR being omitted from any of these lists. Harry Potter isn't just a novel - it's an unparalleled phenomenon. For better or worse, she has transcended "author" with her creation. I think it's fine that she sits in her own group. She's earned it.

As I understood it, there are ten books for every decade but that doesn't mean there is one book allocated to each year within that decade

I may be wrong on that point, though. If you have other information, fine

My point stands- Harry Potter would be very strange company in this list.

That's not the point I was alluding to - rather it was your discussion and choice between two books for 1997 - and thinking it may have been possible to list both.

@Abitofalark

That's not the point I was alluding to - rather it was your discussion and choice between two books for 1997 - and thinking it may have been possible to list both.

I don't know what point you are making- whether it's one book per year or 10 per decade there's no justification for including Harry Potter in the the list for 1990s