Joanne Rowling had two childhood heroes, Jessica Mitford and Robert F. Kennedy. She named her first daughter for the one and took the first name of the other for her second pseudonym, ‘Robert Galbraith.’

Both these choices for role models or exemplars are curious for reasons I hope are obvious. Mitford was a determined and public communist through the worst of the Stalin era and RFK was, with his father, brother, and, some say, his namesake, a serial abuser of women. For an anti-authoritarian feminist from the lower middle class, this hyper-privileged pair from the wealthiest of families with beliefs so contrary to those she champions herself have always just made me shake my head. My childhood heroes were Mohandas Gandhi and Woody Guthrie, both of which men I understood by the time I graduated high school were men with admirable qualities and with off-setting failings that made them unfit as types for emulation.

Tomorrow I hope to discuss Rowling’s reception and then return of the RFK Ripple of Hope Award in the context of RFK, Jr’s recent run for President, endorsement of former President Trump, and predictable response of his family. Today I hope you’ll enjoy JKR’s profession of admiration for RFK, Sr., and why she admired him as she did.

 

I tease my much younger co-workers about their relationship with their ‘Smart’ phones; most are using an Apple product but have become ‘android’ users nonetheless, if you catch my drift. Customers at the store who leave their phones behind inadvertently at the register or in their shopping cart call the store when they realize “I don’t have my phone!” in a panic akin to the realization they have left behind one of their children. Too frequently they exclaim on being reunited with the pocket technology, “It was like losing my brain.”

As something of Luddite with respect to phones — I have a flip phone that I rarely carry with me except when traveling — I shake my head with wonder and judgmental disapproval at this dependence.

I was confronted yesterday with the risible hypocrisy of that posture when my laptop failed. I have had to purchase a new personal computer and face the fact that I have been at least as dependent on this technology as my young cohorts are with their phones. I just don’t carry the PC around with me and consult it every few minutes. Uploading software and regaining access to accounts online will be the better of my day today which drives that point home.

Yesterday I wrote what I thought would be a simple filler piece about Rowling’s “passion” for Thomas Gainsborough’s paintings in her “early twenties,” something she discussed briefly with Frazer in the 2001 Q&A, Conversations with J. K. Rowling. I pledged in that post to write a promised piece today about her love for the Caravaggio painting Supper at Emmaus that she mentioned both in Frazer and in last Sunday’s London Times Q&A. I will be working on bringing my new computer up to speed (and putting my working life here back on track) instead.

Today, though, after the jump, I share three more notes about Thomas Gainsborough and Rowling’s “passion” for his paintings during her formative “early twenties” in London, discoveries I didn’t include in yesterday’s post for lack of time.This morning, I’m wondering if these neglected thoughts are not the more important points about Rowling, the National Gallery, and what the young author saw in the eighteenth century painter. [Read more…]

My personal computer failed today so I am writing this on a spare Dell laptop with Windows 7 and its own issues. I’ll keep it short, consequently, while I try to bring the new computer online.

Sunday’s London Times ‘Culture’ insert had a celebration of the top 100 bestsellers on The Times’ bestseller list of the last 50 years. I wrote about the deceit involved on that list here; Rowling’s Philosopher’s Stone was the only one of her books to make this anniversary party and at only #23 when her seven Harry Potter novels, a heavy finger not being on the opposing scale, would have been in the top ten.

Regardless of that dishonesty on the part of The Times back in the day and currently, the anniversary article featured a Q&A session with Rowling that HogPro backchannel moderators think was just unused “leftovers” from the previous Times conversation with The Presence (same picture, etc.). Five of the fourteen questions were about Philosopher’s Stone, so I have my doubts about that theory.

The most interesting answers that Rowling gave were about Stephen King, trivia about Philosopher’s Stone, and her thoughts about Caravaggio’s Supper at Emmaus. I’m working on a longer post about her answer to “What’s the first piece of art you loved?” but it allows me to review an answer she gave more than twenty years ago to the question, “Do you enjoy art?” in which the Caravaggio painting is mentioned.

That was in Lyndsey Frazer’s Conversations with J. K. Rowling, a juvenile Q&A rather than a proper biography though the book cover still proclaims truthfully “The Only Authorized Biography of J. K. Rowling.” Join me after the jump for her full answer to that question — and the artist and painting she mentioned before Caravaggio. [Read more…]

I complain too often that the world needs a critical biography of J. K. Rowling, one for which the Boswell has researched her personal history thoroughly and professionally, by which I mean “paid private investigators to find ‘Michael’ of Exeter and Manchester among other pertinent Lake facts.” I have thought, incorrectly it turns out, that there hasn’t been even an attempt at a biography worthy of note since Sean Smith’s in 2003.

Search Amazon.com’s book section for ‘J. K. Rowling Biography’ and begin scrolling; there are five pages of attempts. I’m not sure any qualify for “worthy of note” status as most seem to be Kindle exploitation pieces, but at least biographers are aware that Rowling is a hot topic whose life-story and its relation to her work has not been told. 

The surest evidence of this is the report from Kirkus Reviews of a book going to press soon: ‘Biography of J.K. Rowling Coming in 2025.’

The good news? A real publisher has paid a professional biographer to write a 0ne volume history of Rowling’s life and its relation to her work. It’s titled A Pen to Change the World: The Life of J. K. Rowling, it weighs in at 384 pages, and the publication date is February 2025. The author, Solomon Schmidt, has written the biography of another controversial figure, Alan Dershowitz, and hosts the ‘History Bites’ Youtube channel. The publisher’s page for the book has this blurb:

The only complete biography of the most famous author in the world.

J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter saga is the best-selling book series in history. Through her numerous books, the blockbuster films based on her work, and her ground-breaking charities, she has touched the hearts and lives of millions of people the world over. And yet, following her extremely controversial public stance on gender issues, Rowling became a pariah in circles that once welcomed her with open arms.

Rowling’s profoundly compelling life is a story of triumph over failure, defiance in the face of authoritarianism, and the redemptive power of love. Drawing on exhaustive research, wunderkind author Solomon Schmidt has told her story in full for the first time.

The bad or not especially encouraging news?

When the blurb says “wunderkind,” that’s a spin of the fact the author is twenty years old. The book is priced at $32.99, which, even factoring in inflation and the length of the book, is a stretch. And Skyhorse Publishing is not a Big Five publishing house. The openly leftist reporter for Kirkus Reviews felt obliged to throw some shade their way:

Skyhorse is one of the most controversial publishers in the U.S. It published a memoir by filmmaker Woody Allen, who has been accused of sexually abusing his daughter Dylan Farrow, after the book was dropped by Hachette. It has also published books by presidential candidate and conspiracy theorist Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and through its recently acquired imprint Regnery, has released titles by right-wing U.S. Senators Ted Cruz and Rand Paul.

I’m going to be buying a copy for three reasons: (1) maybe Solomon Schmidt found Michael!, (2) the author wrote to me as he began this journey to ask if I’d be willing to answer questions he had while writing the book and we have corresponded off and on consequently (he seems like a nice guy); and (3) I need to learn as much as possible about Rowling’s history because the Fourth Generation of ‘Rowling Studies’ is going to be ‘Lake’ heavy compared to the first three. If I start saving now, I should be able to pay for it come February!

Post: Yes, I promised a post on Supper at Emmaus today. My keyboard failed on that longish post (no joke), which piece may wind up as a Substack site mailing to subscribers. Stay tuned!

Friends in Wales and Argentina wrote me yesterday with the news that there was a featured interview with J. K. Rowling in the Sunday edition of The Times (London), the ‘Culture’ magazine insert. It wasn’t until I read The Rowling Library’s Index page dedicated to it, though, that I learned what had prompted this Q&A, which, with all its Philosopher’s Stone and Potter Mania questions, seemed to apparate via Time Turner from 1997. The Times, it turns out was celebrating the 50th anniversary of its bestseller list. As TRL explains:

The Times has published a special feature today celebrating 50 years of the Sunday Times bestseller list by unveiling the 100 bestselling books of the past five decades. To mark this milestone, they interviewed a select group of prominent personalities, including several acclaimed authors, to delve into their thoughts on books and their personal literary journeys.

Among the authors featured is J.K. Rowling, whose debut novel, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, made the list. In this interview, Rowling reflects on the creation of her first book, the literary influences that shaped her writing—citing Charles Dickens as a major inspiration—and even shares a surprising confession: she couldn’t finish a novel by Stephen King because it was just too frightening.

I share three thoughts after the jump about Rowling’s answers to The Times questions, why Team Rowling had to be delighted with the timing of this Q&A’s appearance, and the value of this compendium of “bestsellers.” [Read more…]