The landmark event of what we are calling the Fourth Generation of Rowling Studies, in which the author’s life events are folded into an appreciation of her writing accomplishments will be the appearance of a ‘critical biography’ of merit that has this as its only purpose, that is, relating the subject’s life events and reading those works strictly within that context. See Brian Boyd’s magisterial two volume biography of Nabokov, Claire Tomalin’s lives of Dickens, Austen, and Wollstonecraft, and Lois Potter’s Shakespeare: A Critical Biography for examples of the defining work of this type.
Given the quality of her advisers and her own remarkable self-awareness, I think it can safely be assumed Rowling, Inc., has plans to take charge of her legacy now, lest a click-bait bio-critical narrative commissioned by her Genderist enemies today be set in stone until long after her death. Representing as her PR team does a personality famous for pre-emptive strikes that backfoot her opponents (a la Hermione in Order of the Phoenix), Fortress Rowling’s best move will be to authorize a critical biography, assuming one is not in progress already — one to which she generously contributes her open answers to questions and urges her heretofore silent friends and family to do the same — that sets the critical ‘Lake’ lenses through which all future readers will read her work. The authorized critical biographer, of course, will be expected to be more than sympathetic to and knowledgeable of Rowling’s views, experience, and artistry.
The trick? The best critical biographies are those written many, many years after the subject’s death. How will Team Rowling identify the best critical biographer today for a still-breathing literary figure? Which one will best be able to write about a living subject when the field has largely been one for literary historians? Here are my best guesses about how this could be done, seven guiding principles, and three suggestions for who should write Rowling’s authorized critical biography. All after the jump!
It should be written by a writer who has written at least one biography of a famous writer.
There are a large stable of writers who have written biographies of contemporary celebrities — politicians, actors and actresses, billionaires, et ceteri — but a ‘critical biography’ in which the life and the written work produced are examined in tandem is a special skill set. For Rowling’s authorized critical biography, Team Rowling should insist that the writer have a track record.
It should be written by a writer who has written a critical biography of a figure whose work Rowling loves.
Rowling’s authorized biographer should share the literary interests that Rowling has.
The top twenty list of Rowling favorites I’ve quickly culled tonight from the 89 ‘Rowling Admitted literary influences’ catalog compiled by Beatrice Groves, Nick Jeffery, and myself in 2020 includes Louisa May Alcott, Agatha Christie, Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, Vladimir Nabokov, P. D. Wodehouse, Colette, “All the Brontes,” Roddy Doyle, Elizabeth Goudge, C. S. Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkien, Jessica Mitford, E. Nesbit, Dorothy Sayers, Shakespeare, Katherine Mansfield, and Isabel Allende.
It should be written by a writer for whose work Rowling has expressed admiration.
Right? If Rowling has read a biography written by the author, why wouldn’t that that be a definite point in the author’s favor?
The only literary biographies I think Roweling has endorsed are Judith Thurman’s Secrets of the Flesh (“[Colette’s] biography, “Secrets of the Flesh,” by Judith Thurman, is one of my all-time favorites”) and Park Honan’s Jane Austen: Her Life (for which I could not find a citation, so, I mention it but cannot be sure it is a Rowling ‘fave’).
It should be written by a writer whose views align with Rowling vis a vis Gender Critical feminism.
The authorized biography free access pass to Rowling and to her friends and family cannot be given to anyone who believes she is a “transphobe” (or “murderer”) or an “ignorant bigot,” not to mention “TERF.” Why give ammunition to an assassin?
It should be written by a writer whose previous biographical exegesis were about a writer who faced similar life struggles that Rowling has had.
Call it something akin to wanting to take a test drive before an expensive car purchase. As noted, a rookie critical biographer shouldn’t be granted the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to tell Rowling’s Lake secrets; more to the point, if the biographer has written about a famous woman author, whose first marriage was a disaster, who struggled with sex and gender roles (and paid a price for speaking and acting out her beliefs), and who held secrets that would have colored contemporary opinion of her, that has to be counted as a step up over other candidates for the job.
Look, then, for biographies of Agatha Christie, Dorothy Sayers, E. Nesbit, Colette, and Katherine Mansfield.
It should be written by a writer who knows Rowling’s work inside and out.
It’s a literary critical biography! If the biographer does not know Rowling’s work, Philosopher’s Stone to Running Grave, inside and out, there’s little point to the exercise. The goal is a biography that throws light into the dark spaces of her stories’ unconscious inspiration from Rowling’s Lake. That just isn’t possible if the oeuvre isn’t known very, very well.
It should be written by a writer in their prime of life.
If the greatest critical biographer is living in a retirement home where he or she organizes his or her notes or writes to friends, this is not a project for him or her. This authorized biography is going to demand remarkable focus, individual resources, and guts, frankly. Just as the lifetime opportunity shouldn’t go to a rookie, the winner of this Willy Wonka lottery shouldn’t be drawn out of retirement for the challenge, either. Claire Tomalin, noted in the introduction to this post, would be the perfect Rowling biographer, except that she is in her 90s.
Those seven guidelines, though, while all common sense and ‘best possible world,’ eliminate every critical biographer on the planet or very close to it. If one manages to click three or four of the boxes, that should be enough.
Here are three possibilities, none of whom check all or most of my seven desired qualities but hit quite a few of them:
Judith Thurman: As noted above, she wrote about Colette and Rowling loved the book. Thurman is clearly a feminist, but I have to think it is very questionable whether she sees eye to eye with The Presence with respect to Gender Critical Feminism. That, her age — almost eighty — and the question of whether she is very familiar with Rowling’s work, makes this a stretch, but, still, Colette! One of Rowling’s ‘Big Three’ influences and favorites and she checks three of the seven qualities listed above…
Laura Thompson: The writer most like Rowling in terms of genre, global success, marital failure and struggles, and biographical mysteries is Agatha Christie. Thompson has written a very well received critical biography of Christie and two about the Mitford sisters. She also wrote a book about the Lord Lucan mystery, a subject which featured mightily in Troubled Blood. If her feminist views line up with Rowling’s and she is a fan, Thompson is a natural fit for the authorized biography slot. [Lucy Worsley, another Christie biographer of note, also deserves an interview.]
Edmund Gordon: For my last pick, I’m going to go off the rails I’ve laid down and go for a writer of an authorized biography of a daring woman writer, outside-the-box feminist, only recently dead, and one who wrote at least one alchemical novel (Passion of the New Eve). The writer is Angela Carter, the biographer is Edmund Gordon, and the biography is The Invention of Angela Carter: A Biography. The subject matter, the contemporary quality of Carter’s work, the exotic and mysterious nature of Carter’s life and her work, as well as the “authorized” nature of Gordon’s effort make me hope he is a candidate in the running for Rowling’s critical bio. Did I mention that Invention won a boatload of awards?
Check out BookRiot’s list of ‘Fifty Must Read Critical Biographies‘ for your favorite candidates. If you want to make your case to Team Rowling for a particular author, your best bet is to write her public relations and legacy protection staff at Mark Hutchinson Management and SouthillSalt, Inc. And please share your ideas and nominations in the comment boxes below!
What a compelling and thoughtful post—thank you for tackling the question of who should write Rowling’s critical biography with such nuance and insight. I loved how you didn’t just name names, but gave us clear criteria‑rubrics for what a ‘good biographer’ in this case needs: familiarity with her oeuvre, critical distance, archival skill, and sensitivity to the intersections of genre, faith, gender and fame.
Your discussion of the unique challenges—Rowling’s immense global profile, the baggage of fandom, the shifting authorial persona, and the polarized reactions she evokes—helped me see why this isn’t just “another literary biography” but a scholarly project fraught with demands.
Thank you for making this question both accessible and serious. Your post doesn’t just ask “who should write it,” it prompts why it matters, how it could be done, and what it would take to do it well. Brilliant work.