Is she our girl?

Is she our girl?

If you're a liberal.

>replying to a post with only 1 retweet/like

There's influential people who say stuff exactly like this, why doesn't she go after them?

Is she talking down to a minority? What a racist piece of shit

I'm gonna have to go stretch my legs while I ponder this one. It really made me think

Why do celebrities even reply to people like this? It only makes them look worse.

She got triggered.

I wonder how the Harry Potter pasta spammer is gonna start this one...

She's not wrong, but no need to write like a cunt. And it's retarded to reply to that and ignore a lot of fans

Her political alignment is merely a symptom of being the author of one of the dullest franchises in media history

Damn...that anti-harry potter guy got DESTROYED by her subtle british wit

They're all libcucks

>She's explicitly referring to her experiences as an Amnesty International employee
>You're known as a famous writer, you cannot give your opinion about politics, but my experiences as a NEET, with occasional part time jobs in the fast food industry, definitely mean that my political opinion must matter

Does Rowling not know what an opinion is? Or criticism?

OP got REKT.

Can - you - not - read - ?

She didn't say she couldn't.

I don't know. Maybe Rowling isn't the genius I thought she was. I thought the Harry Potter movies were pure kino.

Loved the books, too.

>tone policing

lol alt right still thinks this works? this was already taken apart years ago

Rowling is a dumb twat

>women

her, patton oswalt, george takei, wil weaton, neil degrasse tyson are my favorite!!

i can't stand this cunt's face

She clearly states that anyone can have on opinion.

Go back to school.

>say something retarded
>"hey that was retarded"
>LMAO TRIGGERED XDDD

Fuck off ctr

This tweet was really dull almost as dull as the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises. Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though r-right
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Wheres the pic u autist

...

No she doesn't. She says anyone can talk about it but that tweet didn't say she couldn't. It says she shouldn't.

gross

>stay out of politics

You are retard, son.

Anyone can talk about politics but we must ban everyone I label as a racist Nazi bigot.

Harry Potter is pleb filter nobody even understands it basically parallels the british government or general lack thereof (it's why Rowling suggested Gilliam to direct)

It's fucking obvious. And she's right. No wonder since she worked for Amnesty. Op is a fag with a twitter post.

>stay out politics I know what I'm talking about
Said every two party pandering, liberal-conservative dipshit-honeysuckle

>wil weaton
Out.
Get out.
This is worse than admitting your underage.
Get The Fuck Out.

that guy was blown the fuck out by the woman who created the dullest franchise in history. How embarrassing

Regardless of opinion, I love watching famous people put faggots like this in their place. "Hey, you, citizen with an opinion, shut the fuck up and make content!" Deserves to get slapped down.

>hurr durr celebrities should not say anything political because they are supposed to entertain me

Worst pseudo-argument the right has come up with recently

White women are so fucking insufferable

She didn't refute the criticism, she refuted the idea that someone in a democracy, where everyone is able to vote for their politicians, should stay out of political discussions.

They're allowed to have opinions but people get annoyed when they use their celebrity status to tell everyone what they think.

Just write your books and get off your soapbox.

How did that response prove him wrong though?

Hes right, shes a low class grandma who got lucky writing pre-teen drama at an 8th grade level.

Celebrities should stay out of politics unless I agree with them and if they run for office I vote for them

I'm a liberal but I hate it when liberals use celebrities as posterchildren for their political opinions. Nobody can identify with celebrities because they literally aren't affected by any liberal policies because they're rich as shit.

Someone post the pasta/

I'd like to see you write something similar that gets as much popularity. People here love to shit on Rowling because her writing style isn't as elaborate as Dostoyevsky, but you can't deny it's the ultimate nostalgiacore.

>aren't affected by any liberal policies because they're rich as shit.

A liberal? Antagonizing rich people?

What a surprise!

>if you are rich you aren't affected by political policies

You're more removed from the reality than the so-called "celebrities who live in a bubble"

>popular = good

and Justin Beiber is more talented than Mozart because more people under the age of 20 know who he is

...

The movies are pure kino. I liked to the books too.

I don't know why does Sup Forums hate celebrities so much when you supported the presidential campaign of one

Why is this thread still up, but other threads like it are deleted within 10 minutes?

>i can use twitter and you cannot miss celebrity

Mozart is more popular than Justin Bieber

>Implying popular=bad

t. 13 yo

First post best post.

go into any classroom in the Western world and ask the kids whos songs they know

appeal to popularity is a fallacy

strawman

Man, I love how the last week has BTFO Trump voters and proven liberals right about everything.

It's not retarded though. The original tweeter isn't saying she has no legal right to do it, she's saying she has no ethical, moral, or experience driven right to do so. She's saying she has no credentials to do so.

Rowling's response that she can legally do it misses the point entirely

Not that guy but he never said it was good because it was popular.

The point is they are all infinitely more talented than you and. Now, shut up.

But she worked at Amnesty International, which gives her credit to talk about politics. She probably has more credit than the negro tweeter.

"nostalgiacore"

>I'd like to see you write something similar that gets as much popularity

hes trying to attribute merit to some mediocre childrens books because they're popular

>butthurt 25 year old Harry Potter nerd

>because they are supposed to entertain me
That's literally her job

oh look, it's another hidden in plain sight Sup Forums-thread.

You don't need credentials to have an opinion you absolute retard.

Also
>The original tweeter isn't saying she has no legal right to do it, she's saying she has no ethical, moral, or experience driven right to do so

Nonsense. Rowling has more experience than the original tweeter.

1. she clearly does have an experience driven right to do so

2. everyone has an ethical and moral right to speak out against this retarded shite trump is pulling

why should she stay out of politics just because some people disagree with her? why should political opinions be limited to those that have met your arbitrary qualifications?

>13 yo continues to sperg

Popularity means that the books obviously hit the right spots with a lot of people. Rowling has mediocre writing style but the world she's built and the stories she's told are very creative and fun to read. You can't name another contemporary children's franchise that's as creative as hogwarts.

Besides, why are you complaining about the writing style of a children's series anyway? Are you some kind of pretentious faggot?

That's not an argument

who?

cool, then read her books and not her personal twitter account and you'll be fine then

Actually, she's become even more worshipped in liberal circles in the last couple of years for responding to 'normal' people tweeting her in various ways that rang from snobbery to extreme lying cunt, and then sics her followers on them.
The people on her 'side' love it.
She also pro-actively tweets stuff that's basically trolling (lies in favour of her causes) and then when people call her on it, she once again tweets them some bullshit and then her followers harass them for a day.

So I guess she kind of is a Sup Forums shitposter in some ways.

>why should she stay out of politics just because some people disagree with her?
It would be wise not to divide your fan base.

>You can't name another contemporary children's franchise that's as creative as hogwarts.
Really? Harry Potter is nothing more than a series of tired fantasy cliches dumbed down for children.

But she's more honorable than that and believes it better to speak your mind freely rather than make a few $$$

maybe, but to imply she doesn't have the right to do so is fucking retarded, it's her personal account she can do what she wants and deal with the consequences because she's an adult who is allowed to talk about politics

Will she ever be adversely affected by any of the policies she wishes to implement?

Will her children get raped by Abdul? Or is it more likely to happen to the proles she talks down to?

Wow it's almost like writers borrow ideas from each other and inspire writers after them. You're really smart, user!

>an abundance of arbitrary trivia makes a work great
>this is what 'muh worldbuilding' fantasy fans actually believe
Pathetic. Bring back old Sup Forums

Name them then, kid.

Feel like you're vastly overstating likelihood of children getting raped by Abdul, desu.

t. Mohammed

Why don't you name the cliches then and refer them to their original works and tell me why they're bad? Go on, I'll wait.

...

More people has known and will continue to know about Mozart in a timespan of centuries than Justin Bieber who is already forgotten

Even if the kids don't know Mozart's songs, they still know about Mozart

That's fine, but Rowling fails to build on them in any meaningful way. That's not exactly a creative feat.

you seem to think about being raped by abdul a lot user

Of course she has that right

But it's true, the only reason she has a loud voice is because she wrote about witches. It's a step up from actors talking about politics though

Redwall series were better

>maybe, but to imply she doesn't have the right to do so
No one said she didn't have that right. This is literal strawman.

>you're only famous for writing kids books so you aren't entitled to an opinion
says the guy who isn't famous for anything, screencaps his own tweets for internet cred and blurs his twitter handle because he is scared of fucking Sup Forums.

How does she fail? In every book she tackles issues that every reader of that age has. Schoolwork, friendship, talking to girls, loneliness, responsibility, courage, skills. I grew up with harry potter and I could relate to him in almost every book, because the series grew along with me. So how did she fail?

oooooooooooook

>but my experiences as a NEET, with occasional part time jobs in the fast food industry,
Dat projection

Why would he screencap JK Rowling insulting him

no

>Complains about rowling stealing from other fantasies
>Posts a series stealing everything from Lord of the rings, watership down and wind in the willows