As I noted
yesterday, Jo Rowling is not the Daily
Mail’s kind of person. She has been a single parent, has dared to speak out
about the less savoury behaviour of those who scrabble around the dunghill that
is Grubstreet (including an appearance before the Leveson Inquiry during which
she found adversely upon press intrusion), and has not been reliably
conservative in her politics.
She should stick to Harry f***ing Potter, right, c***?!?
So it was inevitable that the legendarily foul mouthed Paul
Dacre would order the most bitter and catty of his Glendas, Jan Moir, to write
a hatchet job on the first Rowling adult novel The Casual Vacancy. Now it seems that the round of interviews prior
to the book’s launch did not include the Mail,
thus compounding the anger of the Vagina Monologue, and meaning that more
smears and abuse would follow.
This has duly come to pass, with today’s rant entitled “Hypocrisy
and the ruthless PR sorcery behing J K Rowling’s invasion of her own privacy”,
under the by-line of Paul Bracchi. Why is Ms Rowling (who is always, in the
antediluvian world of the Daily Mail,
styled “Miss Rowling”) a hypocrite?
Because Dacre has deemed it to be so. The facts will then be carefully selected
to fit the narrative.
How does someone “invade
their own privacy”? It’s a ridiculous concept: what the Mail really means is that Ms Rowling has
given interviews to media outlets that do not meet with the approval of the
Vagina Monologue. And which outlets are these? Have a guess: “favoured newspapers and broadcasters —
namely, the Left-leaning Guardian and
the BBC”. Rattle out of pram time, children!
And the literary world does not approve of the embargo on
reviews for the new book before release date. We know this because Bracchi has
quotes from “a highly respected literary
editor”, who remains anonymous – to no surprise at all – while delivering the
desired quotes, such as “it smacks of
bullying”, which anyone who deals with Paul Dacre knows all about.
Ms Rowling, it is emphasised, “is worth an estimated £560 million”. The Casual Vacancy is alleged to be based on the village where she
grew up, where “some folk there now feel
betrayed”, but none are even quoted, let alone named. There is a particularly
nasty allegation about Ms Rowling’s former agent, which will not be repeated
here, as I fear it may be actionable.
Bracchi finally mentions the content of the book, but only
briefly, and while getting another kick at the Guardian and BBC before sneering that Ms Rowling is “reportedly spending up to £250,000 on a pair
of tree houses for her children in the garden of her Edinburgh residence”.
What is the Mail’s problem? Jo
Rowling has made her pile, and if she wants to keep hold of her intellectual
property, that’s her call.
And no amount of attack pieces will get the Mail access to her. Get over it, Dacre.
It wouldn't be a Mail article without a house price. (even if it is a tree house)
ReplyDeleteOh dear "reportedly spending up to £250,000 on a pair of tree houses for her children in the garden of her Edinburgh residence", or to put it another way. Wealthy tax payer spends some of their money on their family.
ReplyDeleteOh my! JK Rowling is pushing the boat out a bit isn't she. Spending 1/7th of a Dacre on a tree house for your children is immoral, especially if it provides a working class person with a job! Everybody knows that it's immoral to do anything other than invest ones obscene wealth into economically unproductive hedge funds and other convoluted financial products and derivatives!
ReplyDeleteOh my! JK Rowling is pushing the boat out a bit isn't she. Spending 1/7th of a Dacre on a tree house for your children is immoral, especially if it provides a working class person with a job! Everybody knows that it's immoral to do anything other than invest ones obscene wealth into economically unproductive hedge funds and other convoluted financial products and derivatives!
ReplyDelete