In a note of desperation the New York Times illegitimately obtained a copy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and rushed it on to Michiko Kakutani who spent most of the night in a frenzy inducted my metamphetamines and herbal tea trying to read through the whole bloody thing, before giving up around page 300, skipping ahead to the end and in a daze threw together a rambling review comparing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows to Shakespeare, Milton, Dickens, Kafka, Tolkien, the Wizard of Oz, Milton, Star Wars and Spiderman among others. I used to do the same thing when I was a Freshman but I was never a respected New York Times book reviewer. Also I was usually writing about something at least vaguely on the level of Kafka, Milton or Dickens rather than a popular kiddie book.
But this sloppy wet kiss from the formerly respected Michiko Kakutani did not abate the fury of Harry Potter fans who on the command of their billionaire mistress over across the pond began baying with fury at the thought that anyone had read and reviewed the book early?
Why? After all no one was forcing them to read it. They were free to skip past the review. After all it’s not as if Michiko Katakuni had put up spoilers in all caps bright red in the middle of the review. But when dealing with wacky cults, you’re dealing with people who believe that their wishes have priority over yours and that respect for their beliefs trumps everyone else’s rights.
And that’s how this ensued with whiny adult Harry Potter fans registering their whiny outrage.
That does NOT give you right to be so disrespectful to Jo Rowling or her fans. I would have thought that a paper, like the New York Times, would have been able to use their common sense to realise how big this is; you’re doing nothing but embarrass yourselves. You’re proving that you’re no different from the vermin out there, trying to get their name in the headlines for selling the book early.
What in the world does this even mean? Why should a newspaper be respectful of a writer and her fans? I mean more so than the slobbery review the Times had already penned. In fact papers have not only the right but the obligation to be disrespectful of people like this. I would not want to read any paper that treated J.K. Rowling’s insane demands for censorship of the press or that of her fans with respect.
I think that the New York Times could have respected the excitement of their (former) future readers and waited until Saturday to publish the review.
Now we’re required to respect people’s excitement? What does that even mean? Now I’m obligated to respect excitement? This sounds like a Seinfeld episode waiting to happen.
Sorry…..so much BS…..I ain’t buying your self-serving justification. Details is what the book is all about. I’m even now more disappointed in you than I was before. You just couldn’t let it be….its all about the $$ screw the kids!
Yeah because everyone knows the kids rush right off and read the Times book review.
Now, the New York Times should be included along with The Daily News and The Post as not just a blatant but also a singular, shameful example of a newspaper exploding the muggles’ agreement by which we respect both Rowling’s and her readers’ desire to let Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows unfold its mysteries as we read it.
I’m sorry but the only agreement we recognize is that of the United States Constitution not a bunch of adults trying to act like 5 year olds and leaving their children to cry themselves to sleep at home while they camp out in front of Barnes and Nobles’. Muggles? Yes they should be mugged. And mugged hard.
This isn’t just any book, this isn’t just any book release – this is the conclusion of ten years of imagination, mystery, and simply put – pure fun! And you’ve had a hand in trying to ruin it.
I pledge allegiance to the Scholastic Books marketing campaign and its artificially generated pretense at pure fun and mystery. One deluded readership under J.K. Rowling indivisibly stupid with high book prices for all.
I also see that both Mr. Lyman and Mr. Hoyt have taken care to emphasize that Katutani’s review was highly positive and “praised the HP series”. Puh-lease! J. K. Rowling – and all of us HP fans – don’t need someone else to praise this book. We certainly don’t need a writer like Katutani to stamp it approved! We know the series, we know Rowling’s work, and we love it all. And because we do, we want to get it straight from the source – this Saturday!
Who’s stopping you, you overgrown dingbat? You’ve clearly stated that you have no interest in reading reviews because you have absolute faith in the greatness of a book you haven’t read yet. So take your cult over to the bookstore and stop complaining because book reviews are not for you. They’re for people who actually want to know something about a book before embracing it senselessly.
Now let me be clear. I hate spoilers. I hate people who deliberately spoil things for you ahead of time. Normally.
On the other hand between J.K. Rowling’s lawsuits against everyone, the corporate fascist clampdown on stores and her fandom’s shrieking hysteria and sense of entitlement, I personally hope everyone one of these sad examples of the human spaces has someone shove the last page of the book in their faces before they buy it. That would be poetic justice.