Strike & Ellacott Files: ‘Epigraph Misattribution in Ink Black Heart’

Louise Freeman has her finger on the pulse of Cormoran Strike fandom and relays on the HogwartsProfessor staff backchannels news of any important discoveries out there. Today she wrote us a note with the subject line ‘Some Gaffes We Never Caught’ about a post by Lindsay Land at the Strike and Ellacott Files. That post, titled ‘Epigraph Misattribution in Ink Black Heart.’ reveals they “found five misattributed epigraphs. Four of them are the correct author but the wrong title, while one has the incorrect author and title.” The article does not discuss the meaning (or lack of meaning) in these “misattributions” but it very helpfully details the mistaken allusions and provides links to the poems and authors in play.

Professor Freeman’s subject line is in reference to the HogwartsProfessor staff and readership collective collection of mistakes in the Strike novels, mistakes we usually call “gaffes” or “Flints.” The thread of finds for Ink Black Heart is a long one (you can check it out here), but it, as Louise noted, does not include the epigraph mistakes that the ‘Strike and Ellacott Files’ podcast crew has found. Lindsay Land wrote in response to Prof Freeman’s comment after the post that “I guess with so many, it’s going to happen.” The six mistakes — Beatrice Groves had found another misattribution in the epigraph to chapter 51 – are indeed six out of one hundred and eight, but isn’t a 5.5% error rate still extraordinary, as Louise Freeman put it, “with a writer as meticulous as Rowling”?

I don’t know if she is being sarcastic given her awareness of Rowling’s many mistakes in continuity and finer points (as in the difference, say, between Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.), but it’s still a question worth asking: “What, if anything, are we to make of these mistakes?” Join me after the jump for some shameless brainstorming and speculation consequent to this great find at Strike & Ellacott Files. [Read more…]

The Rowling Library #75 is Out! ‘What We Can Expect of the Wizarding Almanac’

As noted the day before yesterday, The Rowling Library‘s March issue has as its cover story Patricio Tarantino’s article on The Wizarding Almanac to be published this October by Bloomsbury. I’m pretty sure it’s the best coverage of this story done to date; he notes the shortcomings of the volume that are evident from the few pages readers have been shown in publicity materials while admiring the concept and the beautiful illustrations. Read the whole thing at TheRowlingLibrary.com, available to be read online or to download as a pdf.

There’s more to that issue, of course, my favorite being the re-visit to the conversation about a film adaptation of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. Warner Brothers, for obvious reasons, really wants it to happen and to cast the original films’ trio of Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson. The TRL writers explain why that isn’t going to happen, reasons that might not occur to everyone, and I enjoyed it very much. I think you will, too!

The Harry Potter Wizarding Almanac

Bloomsbury announced late last week that they will be publishing a book this October, The Harry Potter Wizarding Almanac. For all the details from that announcement, your one-stop resource is TheRowlingLibrary.com; follow that link to TRL’s summary of what to expect in the book, an article I’m told more than 200,000 Potter fans have read. (Patricio Tarantino has already written up his thoughts on the Almanac which will be in this month’s TRL e-zine.)

If any doubters remain who are skeptical about the vitality of Harry Potter fandom, not the official Woke crowd but the gazillion readers who love the story, doubters who think that Rowling has in any way been cancelled, or who do not believe that the Hogwarts Saga remains the Shared Text of the new Millenium, the excitement (and sales) of Hogwarts Legacy and the Wizarding Almanac, not to mention ‘The Witch Hunt of J. K. Rowling’ podcast’s popularity, should help them see the light.

While the new book, available for pre-order, is only #337 this morning on Amazon’s best-seller list and #13 on the sub-category of ‘Children’s Fantasy,’ the #2, 9, and 12 slots on that list are filled by Harry Potter titles, #2 being the seven book series set in print now for fifteen years. Two of the top three titles on the Amazon Children’s ebook list are Potter books and all seven are in the top 25. A guide to Hogwarts Legacy is #39 on the current bestselling book list, the only gaming book there, of course.

I’m not excited about the Almanac, frankly, which promises to be a very beautiful book and an excellent Christmas present for Harry Potter fans. From what I have been read and been told, though, there is nothing new in it from the Rowling Vault miles beneath Gringotts and I doubt very much that its seven chapters, fan-service repackaging of canon material, however exciting the pictorial re-presentation of that information will be, will be anything to be shared with my grandchildren in our read-aloud time. I may buy a copy to review here if no one else does.

That being said, I am delighted by the show of enthusiasm for a new Bloomsbury Potter tome. Fantastic Beasts has been something of a bust relative to the original series, but reader engagement and interest in the Hogwarts Saga continues and seems to be making the essential jump for a classic text as Generation Hex grows up and shares it with their children. Three cheers for that and for the new and vibrant empirical evidence that the Rainbow Reich’s crusade to burn Rowling and her books at the stake has failed.

Strike Series Rankings: The Final Tally

Kurt Schreyer posted a challenge to his Cormoran Strike loving followers on social media to rank the six mysteries from most favorite to least favorite. You can read his summary of the challenge responses he received from his dinner guests and twitter audience as well as his own ranking of the six Strike novels here.

Seven of us who write at HogwartsProfessor responded to this idea with posts that included both rankings and our reasoning and criteria for preferring certain books to others. I started the task here and was followed by Beatrice Groves, Nick Jeffery, Louise Freeman, Chris Calderon, Evan Willis, and Elizabeth Baird-Hardy.

Join me after the jump for a tabulation of our rankings here, a comparison with the first twitter responses, and a few ideas about the various approaches Serious Strikers have taken to rank the series entries thus far with an eye to their merits and demerits. [Read more…]

If Dostoevsky Had Written ‘Harry Potter’

 

The neural network showed how the characters from “Harry Potter” would look like if they were invented by Chekhov and Dostoevsky:

Russian enthusiast Vasily Polyakov has generated portraits of characters from the Harry Potter films in the style of Russian writers Anton Pavlovich Chekhov and Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky. Polyakov shared the results of his work in his group on VKontakte.

To create drawings, the author used the Midjourney neural network. It is not known what kind of requests Polyakov made. The selection includes images of Harry Potter, Hermione Granger, Ron Weasley, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Minerva McGonagall, Voldemort, Severus Snape and Draco Malfoy.

Please do go to the page linked above to see the others; the Hermione, Snape, Draco, Ron, and Dumbledore pictures not shown here are well worth the visit.

The first soul triptych in modern literature remains the best, namely, the three Brothers Karamazov. I think it is fair to assume that Dostoevsky deployed this Patristic-Platonic allegory because of the several allusions to copies of St Isaac the Syrian’s homilies found in that novel, in which collection the three faculties of soul and their right alignment are mentioned repeatedly. Regardless, Chekhov and Dostoevsky inspired ‘drawings’ of Rowling’s characters are a delight, despite their depressing demeanor.

What other authors or playwrights do you think could be used to generate like AI imagery? Shakespeare, for sure; Wodehouse? Dickens? Austen?