Posted on 07/15/2005 10:25:17 PM PDT by Williams
Well the new Harry Potter book has arrived and I can report the first page of the first chapter contains an obvious jab at our president. The book begins with the British Prime Minister awaiting a phone call from the "President" of an unnamed distant country, and wondering when the "wretched man" would call.
As a fan of the books and for that matter of Rowling's personal story and success, I'm saddened that liberal madness had to invade this children's classic. The first chapter was otherwise perfectly enjoyable.
I'm not saying anything else in the chapter was intentionally connected to current events, but I had to draw the comparison with what has ended up in British headlines at the same time as the book release. In the book, the Prime Minister is dealing with unexplained events, at least some of which could be terrorist like. Indeed, they are the work of sinister forces. Whereas I'm sure in this book series, ultimate help will come from the wizarding world, in reality Britain needs the support of the leader J.K. Rowling refers to as that "wretched man." How sadly misguided.
Yes, "wretched man" is a slur. I am well aware she didn't go with Steven Spielberg because he wanted to make Hogwarts an "international" school and the movies more American. But I don't have to read her mind too much on this one. It's obvious, and I'm versatile enough to like her books and recognize what she stuck on the first page of this one.
The Brits are notorious frog-haters. Perhaps the "wretched man" was Jacques Chirac.
Or perhaps the whole thing is set in another time period, say 10 years into the future, so she's referring to another unknown President altogether.
Read much fiction?
Well, as a number of people have pointed out, the biggest problem with your conjecture is that the book is set in 1996. Regardless, J.K. Rowling is not a conservative. She reportedly considered endorsing the Labour Party in the election before last but I believe that she finally chose not to. Her main political activity is heading an organization for one-parent families that basically lobbies for more welfare benefits & other types of support. As a trivia note, she's a relative of former New Zealand prime minister Bill Rowling (Labour Party).
perhaps you're getting riled up over nothing.
tempest in a teacup pops to mind..
This thread needs a big pic of a dude wearing a tinfoil hat.
Chirac is not the president of a "far distant country" from Britain, it's next door. She meant the US and she meant Bush. But I'm content to go to sleep now with the knowledge most Freepers tonight don't want to accept the obvious. Maybe it's because it's such a popular children's book series, which I like myself. But given the political reality at the time she wrote and published this, this reference on the very first page of her book was not generic. It's a reference she would have avoided making, were she not making a point.
SHHH... don't tell the geeks but Star Wars is fiction too and that doesn't seem to stop them from taking pot shots...
I take it, that aside from these books, you haven't and don't read all that much Brit lit. Well, I have! Rowling is tenth rate Roald Dahl, mixed with many other ENGLISH children's books authors. Her work is derivative and why I can't read her ( I keep trying to figure out which book /author she's stolen what from ), though I have tried to. I like the movies, though.
Is there a ghost under your bed, or in your closet, and do you often see black helicopters circling overhead ?
I like the hollywood movie about klinton but I forgot the name.
Plus full tinfoil body suit and shoe covers!
So silly. it's obvious which president she meant, but she'll be happy to know you conservatives will buy the denial she'll issue in a few days. The liberals won't. And now I pledge to go to sleep, wishing you all a good night and assuring you I do not look for black helicopters under my bed before donning my tin foil night cap.
Now I remember, "Absolute Power." With Gene Hackman.
But of course anyone can interpret a fictional book their own way. All fiction is subject to the interpretation the reader puts into it.
Of everything is just SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO bloody obvious, then name me the three English authors she steals the most from. I've already named one, give me the other two; though there are far more than three.
"Children's classic"? It's barely out on the market.
"THEN WHY DIDN'T SHE NAME HIM?"
Your smarter than that.
Wasn't she sued by a guy who wrote a book in the 70's about wizards?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.