Anybody still in here like Harry Potter?
>>>
The New 'They Who Must Not Be Named'
http://pjmedia.com/a-j-rice/2026/07/29/the-new-he-who-must-not-be-named-n4955588#google_vignette
Every week on my podcast Dangerous Laughter, I sit down with people whose ideas deserve a hearing, whether the cultural gatekeepers approve or not. Sometimes it's a politician. Sometimes it's a journalist. Sometimes it's a historian.
This week, it was Solomon Schmidt, a gifted historian whose new biography, A Pen to Change the World: The Life of J.K. Rowling, should have been one of the easiest books in the world to promote.
Instead, it became a case study in modern publishing.
Schmidt told me that organizations serving independent bookstores declined to carry advertising for the book. Harry Potter fan communities that once celebrated every new Rowling project have shown little interest in discussing a biography of the woman who created Hogwarts. Media outlets that ordinarily jump at the chance to cover major literary releases have largely looked the other way.
Think about how absurd that is.
J.K. Rowling isn't an obscure novelist looking for her first break. She's the bestselling author of the bestselling book series in modern publishing history. Her stories have sold hundreds of millions of copies, been translated around the globe, inspired blockbuster films, and introduced an entire generation to the joy of reading.
If that resume isn't enough to justify a serious biography, what exactly is? The answer has nothing to do with literature. It has everything to do with politics.
Somewhere along the way, Rowling stopped being judged primarily as one of the world's most successful authors and became a political litmus test. For some people, her views on sex and gender now outweigh everything else she has ever written, accomplished, donated, or inspired.
You don't have to agree with Rowling to recognize what's happening here. You only have to ask a simple question. When did we stop being curious?
One of the things that struck me during my conversation with Solomon was how straightforward his motivation really was. He wasn't looking to pick a fight. He looked around and realized something that should have been obvious. How could the woman behind Harry Potter, arguably the defining literary phenomenon of the last thirty years, not already have a definitive modern biography?
Charles Dickens has biographies. William Shakespeare has biographies. J.R.R. Tolkien has biographies. C.S. Lewis has biographies.
But the author who created the most successful publishing franchise of our lifetime had somehow become too radioactive for many people even to write about. That should bother anyone who claims to love books.
As Solomon explained, understanding Rowling's life helps readers understand Harry Potter itself. Her struggles with poverty, depression, rejection, and single motherhood weren't footnotes. They shaped the stories. They gave us Harry's loneliness, the Dementors that captured depression so vividly, and the recurring lesson that courage usually comes at a personal cost.
Biography isn't an endorsement. It's an exploration. Somewhere, we've forgotten the difference.
The funny thing is, Harry Potter warned us about this long before social media existed.
Throughout the series, the Ministry of Magic spends as much time managing information as it does protecting people. The Daily Prophet becomes less interested in reporting facts than preserving approved narratives. Dolores Umbridge doesn't need to burn books. She simply decides which voices deserve to be heard and which ones deserve to disappear.
Sound familiar?
Millions of readers recognized those lessons while turning the pages of Rowling's novels. Some seem to have forgotten them the moment they closed the cover.
That brings me to my own new book, The Curse of the Bearded Lady. On the surface, it has little in common with a biography of J.K. Rowling. One is political satire. The other is literary history.
But both books ask the same question. What happens when powerful cultural institutions stop encouraging debate and start discouraging curiosity?
Unfortunately, that's the road we're traveling.
I don't expect everyone to agree with Rowling. I don't expect everyone to buy Solomon's biography. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with me.
That's never been the point.
The point is that readers should be free to encounter ideas, arguments, and people without first receiving permission from self-appointed cultural referees. Publishing used to trust readers enough to let them make those decisions for themselves.
Now too many gatekeepers seem determined to make those choices in advance.
History has never been written exclusively about saints, and thank goodness for that. The people who change the world are usually complicated. They succeed brilliantly. They fail publicly. They contradict themselves. They evolve. That's what makes them worth studying.
J.K. Rowling is one of those figures, whether her critics like it or not.
The greatest irony of all is that Rowling spent years teaching millions of young readers to question authority, resist propaganda, and think for themselves. Harry, Hermione, and Luna never accepted an official narrative simply because someone powerful told them to.
Maybe that's the real reason her books still endure. Because they encourage independent thought.
That may be the most dangerous kind of magic left. Because somewhere along the way, "He Who Must Not Be Named" stopped being a fictional villain.
For too many people, it became the woman who imagined him.
>>>>>
Mad Poet Strikes Again.
| 