This might be extremely unhealthy, but from time to time I need weekends like this one where I just lay on my bed and surf the web while I'm munching on chocolate for hours on end. I love the internet and its ability to make me forget about my day-to-day crap, at least for a while.
Moving on... let's rant a little, shall we?
I just read an article by J.K. Rowling that appeared in The Times UK on Wednesday entitled "The Single Mother's Manifesto." In it, she criticizes David Cameron and the Conservative Party for their proposed changes to British welfare policies.
I am not going to pretend to know anything about the Labour / Tory divide in the UK government; ignorant as I am, I had no idea that 2010 was even an election year in Britain! So I won't comment on her article other than to say I enjoyed her elegant writing style, though it seemed a bit literary for a newspaper editorial.
I will, however, comment on the comments to the article. I would expect readers' opinions to be somewhat informed or, at the very least, not to read like the non-sensical (and at times disturbingly violent) YouTube comments I come across. Not so...
A sampling:
I will never buy another book by J.K. Rowling! She wasn't a single mother, she was a divorce woman. There is a difference. Get real. She worked hard for what she has and she wants to vote for people who will take everything she has if given the chance.
There is no room in this world nor any common sense logic to voting for liberal policies. They enslave people and only care about power. Don't vote the socialists into power. Daniel Hannan needs to be your Prime Minister.
To Connie:
1. Why wouldn't you buy another book by her? True, it is often difficult to separate the artist from the art. And obviously JKR is using her "star power" here to call attention to the issue. But this first sentence is an unnecessary threat / attack that cowardly appeals to other JKR/HP haters looking for any excuse to bash.
2. "She wasn't a single mother, she was a divorce [sic] woman." You do understand she was referring to Cameron's policies on single family homes, right? Funnily enough, those can come about in a variety of ways -- pregnancy sans marriage, death of partner / spouse, and, oh yeah, divorce. I am guessing you only thought of the first, which is a common stereotype / misconception that, if you actually read the article, you'd see she actually addresses.
3. "She worked hard for what she has and she wants to vote for people who will take everything she has" -- so now you are praising her work ethic? Yes, she did work hard, but she also mentions, "I am indebted to the British welfare state" and that, without it, she could not have achieved her successes. You can and should debate whether or not this one story justifies an entire political campaign, but you are missing the point by implying she is stupid or illogical for wanting others to receive the same welfare "safety net" offered to single parents in her day. (Unlike Lord Ashcroft, she is willing to pay taxes on her salary).
Boy, you'd think after becoming a mulit-squillionaire on her own merits she'd let go of some of her hard-warn bitterness and resentment, no? It must be burdensome walking around with that rather large chip on your shoulder. The point of Tory plans is to break the cycle of entitlement and teenage pregnancy. Surely JK you are intelligent enough to recognise such Tory policies were NOT indeed aimed at you, a hard working single mum who only through hard graft and sheer determination made your own success story, (NOT rather from gov't handouts). You are the exception to prove the rule, surely you know this?
To Hope:
see #3 of my response to Connie. JKR may or may not have been "the exception to the rule" re: single parents (her story is remarkable in the rags-to-riches way), but the fact remains that she "was a single parent with a four-year-old daughter, teaching part-time but living mainly on benefits." That's right "benefits," which I guess you could call "gov't handouts."
People liken JKR's experiences to the American Dream, and to some extent, I agree, but I also find it kind of ironic. She is the first to admit she completed HP1 while on welfare (it was only after this that she tried getting certification for teaching). "Hard graft and sheer determination" do not a salary make.
Hope, you need to re-read the article and see what she's actually arguing for.
Ah yes, multi-millionaire, best selling author JK Rowling. Truly the voice of average single mothers everywhere.
Chin up Joanne, those kids books you wrote did quite well in the end :)
Well for someone who was clearly on SOMETHING when she wrote the HP stuff and is now a CHAMPAGNE socialist
this seemed a well balanced article.
She clearly has a chip om BOTH shoulders
To Nick and John:
Your feeble attempt at a clever, one-line response do not obscure the fact that you didn't read the article. Try to make some sense if you decide to post a real response.
To Rog:
I like the "champagne socialist" term... kind of like bourgeois bohème. Not really getting your punch line... this goes for everyone who claim she is so "bitter" with that "chip on her shoulder." So what you're saying is that she should be thankful for what she has and never look back for others? Well, that might upset the following people:
Ms Rowling, what have you done personally to assist these demonised people? You have made a fortune writing books of mass appeal, perhaps now you should give back to the people who have made you so rich.
As a Champagne Socialist, your views are of no concern to those of us who have to live in the real world.
Either do something constructive with your mega millions, (thereby allowing us mere mortals to keep just a little more of our hard earned), to help the feckless waistrels your kind so admire, or go away and shut up.
Brazen hypocrisy born of a chip on the shoulder.
I'm curious, Ms Rowling, how much of your money are you giving to single parents? Surely if you believe what you've written so strongly then you've given most of your fortune to help those less fortunate than you?
Wonderful, a multi-millionaire telling me I should be spending more of my pittance on tax for single mothers.
Why is it that so many rich Labour supporters lecture me on how we should all look after each other whilst keeping their money and living in luxury far from the 'something for nothing' brigade and their antisocial behaviour that ordinary mortals have to live with.
If J. K. Rowling wishes that single mothers receive help I suggest she pay for it out of her huge income from overcharging for her work as an author. I suspect the percentage of her total income that she pays in tax is less than someone on below average income due to council tax, petrol tax, car duty, alcohol tax, tobacco tax, etc.
To R and Nigel and A S and Keith and any of you idiots who don't know the meaning of "research before you make FALSE accusations":
1. She wrote this article to draw attention to the issue, which it has. Though (I think) for the wrong reasons.
2. She is the President of One Parent Families, aka Gingerbread. She mentions the organization by name in the article. She has donated and continues to donate millions to this and other organizations to help single parent families. The Times and / or JKR could have been more clear about her involvement to avoid callous, uninformed comments like yours. On the other hand, in the time it took for you to type up your question and rude commentary, you could have done a simple search for her name. Remember how the internet and gives you the ability to access tons information?? Use it. And try not to be so self-righteous, especially when you really have no idea what you're talking about. Or do you enjoy being ignorant in your anger?
I will end with the most worrying comment(s) of all:
I've never bought a JK Rowling book and now she reminds me why.
I've never read J. K. Rowlings books before now..and she keeps reminding me why.
I have never read J K Rowling's books before...and with all this political pontificating she's doing, she keeps reminding me why.
To V and/or Stephen / Roberto:
Like the majority of your fellow posters, you miss the point. At least they contributed something of substance to the argument.
I really hope that was one pathetic person posting as three. I hate that her writing this article would somehow reflect poorly on the Harry Potter series (see also: Connie). It's not like HP is some giant socialist manifesto... (of course, the Pope once thought its roots were satanic, but that's a different story). I feel like her writing this has polarized HP for many people, which is not only ignorant and unfair, but also deeply upsetting.
On the other hand, there are those like Hope and Rog who seem to praise her talent, while berating her for her views, calling her "bitter." Why should she care about poor single mothers when she is now neither poor nor single? But those like Nigel et al. want her to do more for the issue. Because obviously she needs to just give everything to single families, her own children be damned. That's like saying everybody who laments poverty should turn into Mother Theresa.
I know she can't win either way, and she chose to come out and voice her opinion, for her own reasons, I am sure (she does support the Labour Party, after all), but I really expected more debate about the actual issue and more thoughtful comments.
Ah, well. It was fun ranting about something other than myself for a while.
