JK Rowling new book — chronic illness references

I'm well aware of all that, but unfortunately many if not most people are not, and i'd be willing to bet that the decision making-bods at the BBC wont be, or if they are aware of what 'officialdom' says, then that's just what it says on paper, which they may pay lip service to but lip service only. Attitudes are born from beliefs - which may or may not be based on the facts.

 

The BBC is pretty 'woke' these days. Online concern about JKR and ableism in her new novel appears to be spreading, though as always much of it is social media repetition. Dysautonomia International say they will be looking at the book after concern from POTS patients.

 

This doesn't ring true - for me at least. After coming down with ME, I didn't have any other kind of infection for years. I wasn't all that isolated either. I attempted to return to work several times. Though the jobs by their nature were episodic, the effort involved, given my condition, was probably the most difficult thing I've ever attempted. Returning to work during that period didn't improve my symptoms, but I feel lucky that it didn't make them substantially worse.

If anything, I gradually developed the impression that ME was actually protecting me from common infections, possibly due to a hypervigilant immune system. I didn't get a real "flu' until years later, when I had actually improved somewhat.

Just based on my own experience, I'd be surprised if germaphobia was a common consequence of ME. It would be like climbing out of a pool you've accidentally fallen into and saying, "Gee, I hope it doesn't rain."

[This is just my experience. No offense to anyone with ME whose condition has been worsened by subsequent infections.]

 

Leaving all the problematic content aside, I wonder what JKR's relationship is with her editor? If I had received her manuscript, I'd be itching to slash about half the length. I'd think any editor would since they have to think about book sales.

There are novels of comparable length, but JKR is not of the stature of writers such as Thomas Mann, Marcel Proust, or David Foster Wallace. As a reader, that makes a difference in whether I'm willing to read a book this long. I find her earlier Strike books very entertaining, but not enough to slog through a book this size, even if it didn't have objectionable material.

 

I was the same, I went years without getting even a sniffle while I was mild and still wandering about. The only virus going that I caught in February 2020 is the one that really knocked me on my arse for 9 months, my immune system did not see Covid19 coming, that was my last cold and it was barely a sniffle just the aftermath of long covid remains brutal. I am not avoiding all colds, I appear immune to most of those for some reason, its bleeding Covid I don't want again!

 

Publishing a book during a pandemic that comes across as mocking vulnerable people that have to be careful and shield themselves is an... interesting choice.

 

Modern broadcasting is highly driven by legalism - everything from script to screening will go via the lawyers. Of course there will be interpretations but decisions about content aren't left to a few people in a glass walled office.

It will be interesting to see how the previous Galbraith book "Troubled Blood" is translated to screen - that deals with themes that author is known to have 'controversial' opinions about and which the BBC will have to handle with care. Troubled Blood was published in 2020 and is slated for broadcast sometime this year.

 

Well known problem with commercially successful authors (and JKR is top of the heap) - publishers are very shy to offend their star turns by having editors do a proper job.

 

I have not read that one. But one of the earlier books had a central plot where her message clearly was that “men in womens clothing” are dangerous (years before she started her twitter rants). The whole thing was rewritten, the TV series had none of it.

 

Did you not notice the objectionable content in the previous Strike books?

 

That’s been the headlines about Rowling anyway for the past two years.

I don’t really care if people call us woke activists. They say that now about anyone who wants a marginalised group to be treated better.

But the tide is turning, and particularly amongst young people, the “woke activists” have a lot of support. I say PWME, disabled people in general, transgender people, gay people, people of colour, people who want better rights for workers, we should all be standing together. Let them call us woke. History will be on our side.

 

I am going off topic slightly, but my experience is that other marginalised people are FAR MORE LIKELY to believe PWME /disabled people in general about how we’re being oppressed by the system. I have NEVER had a transgender person not immediately believe me.

 

Yes I think you are bang on regarding the tropery in Rowling’s writing

 

Yeah some of the dislikeable characters were pro-trans rights.
The character who wrote a blog criticising media for ableism and racism and transphobia… turned out to be a paedophile. Subtle.

BTW, worth noting that the framing of “trans rights activists” is used by anti-trans people to essentially mean “any trans person who believes they should have rights”. Rather like the framing of ME patients as “militant activists”.

 

Yeah I was gonna say, the tv series have left out all of the worse JKR judgmental stuff, I doubt this will make it in.

Re your point re book vs tv, well the book is jk Rowling’s (and IMO her editor is incapable of saying no to her), whereas the tv series is an adaptation that she’s not really involved with.

 

Well she thanked her editor in her acknowledgements so she apparently has one! I feel like he’s not able to say no to her on book length etc

 

Yeah I’m betting she had an encounter with somebody with ME who was worried about catching covid

 

No, I didn't. The objectionable stuff didn't register with me in JKR's earlier books. I'll be more aware now in anything I read.

One of P.D. James' novels had a villain who dressed up as a woman so that girls would feel safe in his presence and could be more easily lured into his trap. Of course, James was writing at an earlier time when it wasn't as commonly understood that trans people are far more likely to be victims of violence themselves, rather than perpetrators of it.

 

So what's the correct terminology for those who support trans rights?