JK Rowling denied top US honour
- Thread starter Kaboose the Moose
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Actually, i think that was exactly what she was doing.popdafoo said:
The main issue however, is that the promotion of witchcraft would be seen as a bad thing and that a person should be denied a medal symbolising freedom because of it.
Who cares? Seriously, she's British. She shoudn't care about an American award. She made plenty of money selling to Americans (me included, loved those books) but why does it matter if a country she doesn't live in or ever will doesn't give her an award? For example, I really don't give a damn if my Science project from Senior year doesn't get an award from Bangladesh (which, by the way, it didn't).
Anyway, I can't imagine that this would effect her in any way, she knows she's a good writer.
Anyway, I can't imagine that this would effect her in any way, she knows she's a good writer.
WTF!!!
JK Rowling got kids and adults reading again and she's denied! Worst yet, she was denied for advocating 'witchcraft'?! WTF!!!!!
I wonder if C.S. Lewis or JRR Tolkien would be accepted, or did they advocate too much "elfery" or "anthropomorphizing"?
How low have we gone!
JK Rowling got kids and adults reading again and she's denied! Worst yet, she was denied for advocating 'witchcraft'?! WTF!!!!!
I wonder if C.S. Lewis or JRR Tolkien would be accepted, or did they advocate too much "elfery" or "anthropomorphizing"?
How low have we gone!
This is what I'm thinking. They were't even particularly good books.mspencer82 said:
Just sub-par fantasy fiction.
Regardless of what the reasons for her not getting the Medal of Freedom are, I'm glad she didn't get it.
She doesn't deserve it at all.
This is why there have been very few Christian Presidents in our history. I have nothing against any religion really, but Christianity is renowned for being one of the pushiest religious groups, the OP being a prime example of this.EchetusXe said:
God I hate that woman.
But the reasons for not giving her the award were hilarious. I just wouldn't have given it to her because she's shit.
But the reasons for not giving her the award were hilarious. I just wouldn't have given it to her because she's shit.
I think it's hilarious that it's "just a book" when people are critisising the themes within (however offbase they happen to be). But when someone claims it's "just a book" in regards to the legions of obsessive fans (just go on youtube and search for 'quidditch' and you'll know what I mean), they get all 'serious buisness' on us.CrazyGirl17 said:
You're kidding right? Have you ever listened to Michelle Bachmann? Or most employees of Fox News? Seriously, these people are so stupid they use the phrase "a Fascist Communist" without batting an eyelid. The ability to bleat mindlessly and continuously the more extreme viewpoints seems to be a recipe for political success. Bush was an unbelievable moron, and his inability to comprehend basic issues wrought terrible havok upon many less educated American's world view.Skarin said:
Whenever I'm having a political discussion the question often comes up of why Obama isn't crucifying Bush with war crimes and airing out all Bush's dirty laundry. My answer is simple, Obama remains unsure how many Americans believe Bush was right about abortion/terrorism/torture/legislation/foreign policy/healthcare so he holds off to keep them sweet. We all wanted to see George, Dick and Don getting screwed but the reality is they are old men desperately trying to improve their image post-incumbency and Obama knows history will not look back on them fondly. It is the greatest revenge he could bring upon them...
Well right now Bush-bashing is hip, and it's one way for people to try and distance themselves from what they see as an unpopular president during a new administration. In general every former President gets a lot of smack talked about them after the fact. For people formerly in goverment to come out and deny this kind of thing lends it too much credibility so it's mostly ignored. Strangely a lot of liberals will believe anything they hear when it's negative for Bush.
That said I personally don't think JK Rowling deserved this award, I don't think she's quite in the same league as other recipients for quality of writing. Harry Potter "means" very little and simply entertains for the most part.
There are also political issues attached to the book especially later on. For example I personally did not care for the entire "Dumbledore is Gay" thing, I felt it should have been left unstated ( if it wasn't just an attempt to grab another headline ). Not due to my general thoughts on gay men or anything, I just fail to see what they has to do with anything in the story or how it really belongs there. I certainly would never have thought of things that way if SOMEONE hadn't come out and said that. Now of course we get to see a children's series totally dragged through slime that is going to hurt it in the long run.
It's odd how often I refer to a humor/shock site (Encyclopedia Dramatica) but in their own way, it sort of makes the point, especially when you see how much material they were able to pull for this. Check out the cartoon/video in paticular:
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Harry_Potter
I think to an extent it became fairly obvious that JK Rowling changed due to success and her attitude during the last few books was entirely differant than the one she started with. Basically the JK Rowling behind the scenes of the last books was NOT the same person who started the series we all fell in love with (including me).
There are plenty of reasons for her not receiving that award, despite it being a very good series that will almost definatly do the multi-generational thing.
Add to this that she's not a US Citizen (I don't think even a dual citizen) and I have to wonder because that is supposed to be an Award for American achievements is it not? Sort of like how Britan has their own.
As far as the encouragement of sorcery, well I wonder how many books receiving the award were magical fantasy/sword and sorcery/etc... I can see this being a factor since awards are always based on opinion and the whole genere is considered very "base".
Plus while I have nothing against Wiccans, and other "modern witches", and their right to do whatever they want, I have increasingly less respect for the institution as a whole and see it and the whole "new age" thing as a bit of a long-running fringe fad, that has been slowly dying as it has become more and more mainstream. Wicca seems to have nothing to do with the JK Rowling Books, but I can see where they might want to avoid it, along with how like back in the 1960s you had people writing all kinds of stuff involving the "benefits" of acid.
Given that Wicca has been fluctuating in popularity since it REALLY started back in like the 1950s, and really hasn't had that much of a cultural impact compared to other things (not saying none, just none that is accepted by the mainstream), if tying the books to this is what Bush meant (even if he would be WRONG) I'd think he'd be right.
Not to mention the fact that in a nation with a seperation of church and state, sorcery/majick/etc... can be viewed as a sort of religion as it has a lot to do with how reality works, and by acknowledging such concepts nationally, even in fiction, he could feel that it sets a bad precedent.
A long ramble based on guesses IF this was real. Truthfully, I very much doubt the book is accurate. All these political "tell all" things are pretty ridiculous, and they are always out there. Obama will get his after his presidency, though his popularity will determine how seriously it's taken. Just take them as a bunch of lulz, and a staffer after his five minutes of fame.
That said I personally don't think JK Rowling deserved this award, I don't think she's quite in the same league as other recipients for quality of writing. Harry Potter "means" very little and simply entertains for the most part.
There are also political issues attached to the book especially later on. For example I personally did not care for the entire "Dumbledore is Gay" thing, I felt it should have been left unstated ( if it wasn't just an attempt to grab another headline ). Not due to my general thoughts on gay men or anything, I just fail to see what they has to do with anything in the story or how it really belongs there. I certainly would never have thought of things that way if SOMEONE hadn't come out and said that. Now of course we get to see a children's series totally dragged through slime that is going to hurt it in the long run.
It's odd how often I refer to a humor/shock site (Encyclopedia Dramatica) but in their own way, it sort of makes the point, especially when you see how much material they were able to pull for this. Check out the cartoon/video in paticular:
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Harry_Potter
I think to an extent it became fairly obvious that JK Rowling changed due to success and her attitude during the last few books was entirely differant than the one she started with. Basically the JK Rowling behind the scenes of the last books was NOT the same person who started the series we all fell in love with (including me).
There are plenty of reasons for her not receiving that award, despite it being a very good series that will almost definatly do the multi-generational thing.
Add to this that she's not a US Citizen (I don't think even a dual citizen) and I have to wonder because that is supposed to be an Award for American achievements is it not? Sort of like how Britan has their own.
As far as the encouragement of sorcery, well I wonder how many books receiving the award were magical fantasy/sword and sorcery/etc... I can see this being a factor since awards are always based on opinion and the whole genere is considered very "base".
Plus while I have nothing against Wiccans, and other "modern witches", and their right to do whatever they want, I have increasingly less respect for the institution as a whole and see it and the whole "new age" thing as a bit of a long-running fringe fad, that has been slowly dying as it has become more and more mainstream. Wicca seems to have nothing to do with the JK Rowling Books, but I can see where they might want to avoid it, along with how like back in the 1960s you had people writing all kinds of stuff involving the "benefits" of acid.
Given that Wicca has been fluctuating in popularity since it REALLY started back in like the 1950s, and really hasn't had that much of a cultural impact compared to other things (not saying none, just none that is accepted by the mainstream), if tying the books to this is what Bush meant (even if he would be WRONG) I'd think he'd be right.
Not to mention the fact that in a nation with a seperation of church and state, sorcery/majick/etc... can be viewed as a sort of religion as it has a lot to do with how reality works, and by acknowledging such concepts nationally, even in fiction, he could feel that it sets a bad precedent.
A long ramble based on guesses IF this was real. Truthfully, I very much doubt the book is accurate. All these political "tell all" things are pretty ridiculous, and they are always out there. Obama will get his after his presidency, though his popularity will determine how seriously it's taken. Just take them as a bunch of lulz, and a staffer after his five minutes of fame.
