Here, There, and Everywhere  

I was reading my everyday blogs when I came to Pat's Fantasy Hotlist and today's post..

He directs us to an article by none other than Orson Scott Card.  It relates to the J K Rowling lawsuit concerning Harry Potter.   Uncle Orson Reviews Everything  Orson Scott Card   which was actually done on April 20, 2008

Basically, I know about this lawsuit but what he said got me thinking, which is always dangerous, and I did a little browsing on the web concerning the subject.

One of the first articles I came across an interesting comparison between Harry Potter and The Worst Witch written in 1974 found "here" ..

I continued to search around and came by this:

So What Aspects of "Harry Potter" are in the Public Domain?
Apparently, a lot of it was floating around for years before Rowling's book. The idea of a kid named Harry Potter, or something similar that is involved in magic has been floating around for years. She claims the ideas just pop into her head. Interestingly, she says she hopes she never finds out where she gets her ideas from. Maybe she means she hopes WE  never find out where she gets her ideas from. She DID NOT INVENT THE HARRY POTTER CHARACTER anymore than Walt Disney created Cinderella. To prevent other authors from selling fictional books with the Harry Pottercharacter is a travesty.

and continuing on.....more articles found..

here..

here..

and here..

and even here!

Needless to say, if you want to search on yourself, you won't run out of links to click on for a while!

So, I'm interested in opinions on the subject...

On one hand I was so totally happy for Rowling to have come so far and become rich and famous for her books, and for getting kids to read again etc... all good stuff!

Then before the last book came out she said something that made me think "less" of her.  It concerned the "reason" she was killing off characters, so no one could ever use her characters.

My feelings on that one was simple.. though I totally agree it would hurt like heck (and be unforgivable) for someone to steal your characters but, to me, her mistake was talking about it in such a way to the public.  It's a known fact to any author to be protective of their story and characters.. but you don't come out sounding mean and vindictive to people when it hasn't even happened. 

Point being.. it came across "wrong"..

"here you are my wonderful public that made me so rich and famous, and for this I will kill off loving characters because I don't want any of you awful people stealing them".. hello?  never mind.. it just hit me totally wrong!

Now comes this lawsuit again Lexicon, who she openly backed up until now!.. again.. it seems "wrong".. and yes, to me, it's another thing making me not respect J K Rowling like I did when she was the underdog fighting for her writing and climbing the ladder.

I do believe, at times, money does change people.  Maybe even more so when you had none and quickly become very wealthy and "powerful"... not sure if its a money thing or a power thing.. but I do believe this lady "J K Rowling".. has changed.. and not for the better.  I just don't hold the same amount of respect that I had for her a few years ago.

... how about you?  what do you think of all of this??  What do you think of J K Rowling now? 

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this

• #3 Comment from mavarin
  5/6/08 1:49 AM | Permalink

  No, sorry, can't take that seriously. I expect that somewhere in fiction there has been a character named Harry Potter before. After all, "Harry" and "Potter" are both common English names. However, you're not going to find another Harry Potter who started attending a school of wizardry at age 11 after semi-accidentally surviving a magical attack in his infancy, whose best friends are a poor redheaded boy from a large family and a brainy daughter of dentists, etc., etc. You *are* going to find lots of alienated, downtrodden characters who attend a magical school and ultimately save the day, because the outsider hero is an important trope in fiction generally, and the school of magic, while not quite a cliche, is fairly common. I had one in the Mavarin books before the first HP book hit the shelves, but one book has nothing to do with the other. Harry Potter is as much Richard Kimbel, Frodo Baggins, Oliver Twist, Rani Fost, etc. as he is the girl in The Worst Witch - which is to say, they all arise from the same archetype, but are by no means copies of each other.
  
  Elements of the HP books that legitimately come from elsewhere include many of the mythical creatures (e.g. dragons and unicorns and centaurs) and some of the magic principles, but there's nothing wrong with that. Anyone can have a centaur, even a wise and learned centaur. But even there, Rowling has put her own stamp on things.
  
  And oh, good. Now I have something to blog about tonight!
• #2 Comment from slapinions
  5/2/08 10:19 PM | Permalink

  I've written about Rowling in your comments section before, so I'll spare you that. But I have to (gasp!) defend Rowling re: Harry being around before her books. Even if true I think your Cinderella comparison is apt. Without her imagination and her drive the character is nothing. Rowling is what makes Harry work. Not sure if I'm explaining that right, as I've had a few Smirnoff's already :) but at any rate, have a good weekend.
  
  Dan
  
  http://journals.aol.com/slapinions/Slap-Inionscom
• #1 Comment from rdautumnsage
  5/2/08 12:23 PM | Permalink

  There is such a thin line in plagiarism these days...with the internet exploiting books, authors and artist I seriously don't think she has a foot to stand on. In the end one author had better luck at using the character references to make millions off of. Stopping someone else from that same endeavor seems pointless and pitiful to say the least. (Hugs) Indigo
  http://journals.aol.com/rdautumnsage/ravens-lament/