Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What does JK Rowling do with her money?
Daily Mail ^ | 24th August 2006 | ALISON BOSHOFF

Posted on 08/24/2006 7:31:16 AM PDT by null and void

For a woman who claims her life is 'mundane', JK Rowling likes a luxury holiday. In the past few years she has cruised the Galapagos at a cost of around £15,000, blown £14,000 on a holiday in Mauritius and enjoyed the comforts of a £6,000-aweek hotel in the Seychelles.

Her latest outing, however, tops the lot. For, after a charitable engagement in New York, she and her family have decamped to the Hamptons, that millionaire's playground on the East Coast, to stay in an imposing seven-bedroom beachfront house. The cost - £76,000 a week.

JK Rowling (and husband Neil) splashing about in the sea on a recent holiday.

Jo Rowling can, of course, afford it - and then some. Her fortune is somewhere between £500million and £600 million and, when the seventh and final instalment of Harry Potter is published next year, will receive another significant boost.

More money generated by the movies, merchandising and royalties from the books will continue to roll in for the rest of her life.

Indeed, the scale of her wealth is such that it is hard to comprehend. It has been said she is richer than the Queen. She earns around £1million every three days. It is the kind of fortune it would be impossible to spend even if she stayed in that luxury pad in the Hamptons all year round.

Her life now is, naturally, very different from the hand-to-mouth struggle of the days before Potter was published. Back then, she famously nursed cold coffees in an Edinburgh cafe for hours as she wrote, her daughter Jessica sleeping in a buggy beside her. She subsisted on £70 a week benefits, and her flat was infested with mice.

Now, she has a property portfolio (Edinburgh, Perthshire and Kensington), flies by private jet and dresses herself in Vivienne Westwood for special occasions.

And yet the story of what Jo Rowling spends her money on is far from a predictable tale of conspicuous consumption. Indeed, it is a story which provides a valuable and uplifting counterpoint to the circus of pointless and continuous spending indulged in by other modern celebrities like, say, Victoria Beckham.

Having found fame and fortune late in life, she has not been tempted into any fashion excesses. Indeed, she has never been particularly interested in style, and often describes her younger self as a 'freckled beach ball'. She is appalled by the excesses of modern celebrity culture and particularly disturbed by the cult of thin-ness.

That said, she does like a nice handbag, and glamorous shoes - Jimmy Choo, Prada, or even Dior. When she won a literary award earlier this year, she told the audience: 'My first award was a Nibbie, but that night I was wearing much, much cheaper shoes.'

But as she told an interviewer recently: 'I've got a mental amount I can't spend beyond. I limit myself to what I think I would be justified in spending on frivolity.' The amount, it seems, is around £500.

For although her life is comfortable and she allows herself some 'treats', in truth Jo Rowling lives not much better than the wife of say, an averagely successful City banker. She does not have, a la Posh, a dozen diamond-encrusted watches - actually she barely ever wears one and the most expensive in her collection is a fairly simple £300 number from Gucci.

She would be quite horrified by the idea of buying, as Victoria has done, an expensive designer watch worth several thousand pounds for one of her three children (Jessica, from her first marriage, is 11, David is three and Mackenzie, her baby daughter, one).

Luxury cars

Nor does this woman, who is among the wealthiest in the world, allow herself the decadent pleasure of one of the new generation of luxury cars. Sources in Edinburgh indicate that she doesn't even have a Chelsea tractor. She prefers something anonymous, as does her husband Neil Murray.

(Murray, for goodness' sake, continues to work as a GP and, in her own words, 'doesn't really spend money'.)

At times over the past nine years she has seemed to be in open rebellion against her wealth. She, for instance, insisted on delivering both her children in her local NHS hospital, and her offspring are educated at local state schools.

It's not that she was born poor: her childhood was comfortable, and her father is a retired Rolls-Royce engineer. But she does have that formative experience of poverty as a young adult after the break-up of her first marriage, and this seems to have combined with a sense of social justice to make her a very uneasy multi-millionaire.

For, it emerges, her wealth has made her uncomfortable to the point of soul-searching, if not actual anguish. And although she is now far more sanguine about the 'ludicrous' amount of money which she earns, she still seems to believe, deep down, that she does not really deserve to be so utterly, stinking rich.

And so she has quietly but steadily been engaged in giving away great chunks of her money. She gave £22 million to Comic Relief, for instance.

Charity

She has just set up a charity, the Children's High Level Group, to promote children's rights, particularly disabled children in care homes in Eastern Europe. She is the global ambassador for the National Council for One-Parent Families, and patron of Maggie's Centres for cancer sufferers and the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Scotland.

Her bounty extends to smaller matters, too: she has funded the making of a short film about domestic abuse, and recently donated a signed copy of Harry Potter that was sold to help improve facilities at a local GP's surgery.

For Jo Rowling, an intelligent graduate who worked for Amnesty International after university, has never lost her social conscience. She has told interviewers that she has spent years being 'a few steps behind' her burgeoning fame and fortune, feeling caught out and overwhelmed by it.

She said: 'It just seems, well, this came to me through doing the thing I love doing most. I suppose I feel I haven't suffered enough.'

Of late, she has settled into her super-rich status, becoming more at ease with all of the nice things she can now have - hence perhaps the stay in the Hamptons.

'I'm certainly not going to complain about the money,' she said earlier this year. 'If you've literally been worrying "Will the money last until the end of the week?" you will never, ever complain about having the money.'

So what, then does she spend it on - apart from travelling and helping people? A major expense is her staff. She employs two secretaries, to deal with the 1,000 or so letters she receives a week.

She also has a very effective PA, who works full time co-ordinating her diary and her engagements.

More expensively, she is said also to pay the wages of a full-time, ex-SAS bodyguard, who gives close protection to her and her family at a cost of £150,000 a year.

Her 'day-to-day' house in Edinburgh has electric gates, high fences and a sophisticated CCTV system to deter intruders.

That makes it sound obtrusive, but the house is not ostentatious.

The home is actually two houses knocked into one - a 13-bedroom pile worth around £2million.

Described as homely and sometimes chaotic inside, it is decorated in strong colours and the ethnic patterns that she has always loved.

She lives simply. Her office is the size of a single bedroom. She writes in the morning, makes herself a sandwich and then writes again until it is time for Jessica to return from school.

Some weekends she spends with Neil and the children at their country home in Perthshire. This property, on the banks of the River Tay, is beautiful but not particularly grand, with six bedrooms.

The final property in her portfolio is a home in Kensington, West London, worth £4.5million. It seems more of an investment than a home.

'The point about Jo,' says a friend, 'is that she doesn't want to be flashy or ostentatious, ever. She wants to be left alone to have a normal family life.'

It seems the legacy she wants Harry Potter to leave is a charitable one: of giving and helping children in desperate need. Her own family, she hopes, will turn out to be simply normal.

One does wonder if Brooklyn, Romeo and Cruz Beckham were to meet Jessica, David and Mackenzie in 20 years' time, what they would make of each other, and of their own, very different, childhoods.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: classenvy; generalchat; harrypotter; jkrowling; millionaires
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 next last
To: null and void
What does JK Rowling do with her money?

CONSERVATIVE: That's none of my business.

LIBERAL: She earns $100M a year? She must be one of those evil rich people that don't pay enough in taxes. How dare she vacation at the beach when millions of children are starving in inner cities. And it will serve her right, too, when global warming causes ocean levels to rise and wash away her beach home. Oh, and she didn't have a pink ribbon on her swimsuit! She must be some homophobic fascist that wants the billion gay people on this planet to die! I bet she clubs baby seals and spotted owls, too....

21 posted on 08/24/2006 7:39:33 AM PDT by Fudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

I couldn't agree more. I don't care for her books, but she has discovered a market niche and has produced. She has earned her money and has the right to spend it however she wishes.


22 posted on 08/24/2006 7:39:37 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kromike

It's just nice to see someone giving back!

Eastern European orphanages leave much to be desired.


23 posted on 08/24/2006 7:39:41 AM PDT by netmilsmom (To attack one section of Christianity in this day and age, is to waste time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Who cares what she does with her money? She earned it, she can spend it any way she wants.


24 posted on 08/24/2006 7:39:58 AM PDT by gramho12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Who cares?


25 posted on 08/24/2006 7:39:58 AM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mariabush
Hopefully she would pay the government back the money that she took when she was on welfare.
I have a feeling she's paid the government many times more that what she received.
26 posted on 08/24/2006 7:40:19 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain

You care enough to post to the thread...


27 posted on 08/24/2006 7:40:25 AM PDT by null and void (Islamic communities belong in Islamic countries.- Eric in the Ozarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: lesser_satan

Yes, she is pretty attractive, and no youngin' either. Notice how they did publish one unflattering picture. The press are a bunch of losers.


28 posted on 08/24/2006 7:40:46 AM PDT by cdcdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: null and void
I think I would act the same way myself if I came into that kind of money. I'd stay down to earth and keep things low-key. Of course, I'd take the occasional fling when taking vacation. About the only thing extravagant I might buy would be a plane. Always wanted to fly and own my own plane.

I think when people come into wealth too early, it skews their values. People who achieve wealth in middle-age after knowing what it is like to struggle, tend to handle money much better.

29 posted on 08/24/2006 7:41:15 AM PDT by SamAdams76 (I am a big fan of urban sprawl but I wish there were more sidewalks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Stephen King makes $40M a year just on royalties, making him worth close to $1 billion. He lives modestly, plays home team baseball, and gives to many charities. He's a good role model.


30 posted on 08/24/2006 7:41:22 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mariabush

I don't think she is given a choice on that.


31 posted on 08/24/2006 7:41:58 AM PDT by Sam Cree (Don't mix alcopops and ufo's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Being annoyed by a useless topic doesn't mean I'm interested in it, but nice try.


32 posted on 08/24/2006 7:42:19 AM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cdcdawg
The press are a bunch of losers.

Puh-leze! Around here, that's "loosers." I'm series.

33 posted on 08/24/2006 7:42:27 AM PDT by Mike Bates (Irish Alzheimer's victim: I only remember the grudges.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Most gals marry men for what's inside ... really. So there's hope. :)


34 posted on 08/24/2006 7:43:03 AM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fudd

LOL! Love the baby seal and spotted owl part. ;^)


35 posted on 08/24/2006 7:43:25 AM PDT by ABG(anybody but Gore) ("By the time I'm finished with you, you're gonna wish you felt this good again" - Jack Bauer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mike Bates
"Puh-leze! Around here, that's "loosers." I'm series.:

Thank you!

36 posted on 08/24/2006 7:43:45 AM PDT by Sam Cree (Don't mix alcopops and ufo's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: kromike

The British are socialist. They find it perfectly natural to pick at people with money. It only seems boorish over here in the provinces.


37 posted on 08/24/2006 7:44:36 AM PDT by ichabod1 (Peace In Our TimeĀ®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: lesser_satan

Yes, she is pretty attractive, and no youngin' either. Notice how they did publish one unflattering picture. The press are a bunch of losers.


38 posted on 08/24/2006 7:45:14 AM PDT by cdcdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: null and void

I'm glad to hear this. I was half afraid that this was going to be a George Soros type of ending.


39 posted on 08/24/2006 7:45:35 AM PDT by Old_Mil (http://www.constitutionparty.org - Forging a Rebirth of Freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
With all due respect, again I say, "so what?"

What feels nicer to you: someone you'll likely never personally know "giving back", or you yourself donating time and/or money to your favorite charitable organizations?

It just seems pointless to get all warm & fuzzy via celebrity projection.

40 posted on 08/24/2006 7:45:37 AM PDT by kromike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson