J.K. Rowling's name has become synonymous with her legendary "Harry Potter" book series, but she is also famous for something more controversial: her public and often contentious views on the transgender community. While the final "Harry Potter" book was released in 2011, the last several years have seen a renewed uptick in news about Rowling due to her disparaging remarks about transgender people. This has led to backlash from many in the fantasy community and even from the three stars of the acclaimed "Harry Potter" film series. But despite the controversy, Rowling has not shown any signs of slowing down.

2018: Rowling 'likes' an anti-trans tweet, says it was an accident

An early instance of Rowling facing allegations of transphobia came in March 2018, when she was slammed for "liking" a tweet that referred to trans women as "men in dresses." But the author's spokesperson told Pink News this was purely an accident. "I'm afraid J.K. Rowling had a clumsy and middle-aged moment and this is not the first time she has favorited by holding her phone incorrectly," the spokesperson said.

Rowling later said she "absent-mindedly" liked the tweet when she meant to screenshot it because she had taken "an interest in gender identity and transgender matters."

2019: Rowling follows 'self-professed transphobe' on X, then called Twitter

Rowling faced backlash after following YouTuber Magdalen Berns on X, then called Twitter. Berns was a "self-professed transphobe" who made videos with titles like "there is no such thing as a lesbian with a penis," Pink News said, adding that she was also following other anti-trans accounts. Rowling later admitted she followed Berns, an "immensely brave young feminist and lesbian who was dying of an aggressive brain tumour," because she "wanted to contact her directly."

2019: Rowling stands with researcher who lost contract over anti-trans statements

Months later, Rowling came under fire again for coming to the defense of Maya Forstater. At the time, the researcher had been waging an employment discrimination battle, as her contract with a think tank wasn't renewed after she made a series of anti-trans statements. These statements included that people should not be "compelled to play along with literal delusions like 'transwomen are women,'" and she referred to a gender-fluid person as a "man who likes to dress in women's clothes."

In a tweet, Rowling stood with Forstater: "Dress however you please," she said on X. "Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?"

2020: Rowling likes another controversial tweet

Rowling was again critiqued for reportedly liking another anti-trans tweet, in this case one that misgendered psychotherapist and photographer Alex Drummond and described her as "an adult human male who claims to be a lesbian (yes, he's kept his dangling bits and skipped the hormones)."

2020: Rowling's tweets spark backlash

The controversy escalated significantly in June 2020 after Rowling tweeted about an article with the headline, "Creating a more equal post-COVID-19 world for people who menstruate."

"'People who menstruate.' I'm sure there used to be a word for those people," Rowling said in a tweet. "Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?"

The next month, Rowling landed herself back in the spotlight with a thread defending "liking" a tweet that compared hormone prescriptions and antidepressants. Health professionals are "concerned that young people struggling with their mental health are being shunted towards hormones and surgery when this may not be in their best interests," Rowling said on X in her defense. She compared it to a "new kind of conversion therapy for young gay people," who are "being set on a lifelong path of medicalization that may result in the loss of their fertility and/or full sexual function."

2020: Rowling publishes essay defending her stance as actors speak out

Rowling published an over 3,600-word essay on her website about why she had spoken out on "sex and gender issues." In it, Rowling said she is "worried about the new trans activism" and "the huge explosion in young women wishing to transition and also about the increasing numbers who seem to be detransitioning."

She went on to slam those who said that "women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves." Rowling revealed she is a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault and said this led her to sympathize with women who had "concerns around single-sex spaces." She argued against throwing "open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman."

2020: Rowling returns award after being condemned for her statements

After Rowling received the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Award in 2019, the human rights group's president released a statement the following year expressing "profound disappointment" that the author "has chosen to use her remarkable gifts to create a narrative that diminishes the identity of trans and nonbinary people."

As a result, Rowling announced in August that she would return the award. The group's statement "incorrectly implied that I was transphobic, and that I am responsible for harm to trans people," Rowling said. As a donor to LGBT charities and a "supporter of trans people's right to live free of persecution, I absolutely refute the accusation that I hate trans people or wish them ill."

2020: Critics suggest Rowling's new novel is anti-trans

Rowling published a new novel titled "Troubled Blood" under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith. The book, which revolved around a male serial killer who dresses like a woman, was accused of being anti-trans.

It was disappointing that Rowling was propagating a "long-standing and hurtful presentation of trans women as a threat," a spokesperson for Mermaids, a charity that supports trans children, said to CNN. Rowling, meanwhile, said the book "was loosely based" on real killers.

2021: Rowling criticizes police for letting rape suspects identify as women

In another controversial tweet, Rowling shared a Times of London piece about the "'absurdity' of police logging rapists as women," which said police in Scotland would "record rapes by offenders with male genitalia as being committed by a woman if the attacker 'identifies as a female.'"

Rowling evoked "1984" by tweeting, "War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. The Penised Individual Who Raped You Is a Woman."

2022: Rowling criticizes bill that would make legally changing gender easier

Rowling condemned a bill in Scotland that would make it easier for a trans person to legally change their gender, Variety said. It would remove the requirement that applicants must be "medically diagnosed as having gender dysphoria" and "go through a minimum two year process and be aged over 18," lowering the age to 16, The Times said. On X, Rowling said the bill would "harm the most vulnerable women in society: those seeking help after male violence/rape and incarcerated women."

2022: Quidditch distances itself from Rowling

Quidditch, the actual sport inspired by the fictional sport within the "Harry Potter" universe, announced it was changing its name to Quadball. There were a number of reasons for this, but one was that Rowling had "increasingly come under scrutiny for her anti-trans positions," the International Quidditch Association said.

2022: Rowling publishes a book about a character being accused of transphobia

Rowling released another book in 2022 that drew scrutiny in light of her anti-trans controversies. Again published under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith, the book, "The Ink Black Heart," follows the creator of a YouTube cartoon, Edie Ledwell, who is accused of being transphobic. "The book takes a clear aim at 'social justice warriors' and suggests that Ledwell was a victim of a masterfully plotted, politically fueled hate campaign against her," Rolling Stone said.

2022: Rowling responds to calls to boycott 'Hogwarts Legacy'

After trans YouTuber Jessie Earl tweeted that supporting "Hogwarts Legacy" would be "harmful to trans people," Rowling responded, comparing this stance to book burning. "Deeply disappointed @jessiegender doesn't realise purethink is incompatible with owning ANYTHING connected with me, in ANY form," Rowling said. "The truly righteous wouldn't just burn their books and movies but the local library, anything with an owl on it and their own pet dogs." Two days later, Earl said she was bombarded with comments that included "calls for my death, insinuations that I'm a pedophile, dehumanizing comments about my supposed masculine features."

After "Hogwarts Legacy" debuted in 2023, reviewers from major outlets wrestled with the implications of purchasing a game that would financially benefit Rowling. Reviews, however, were largely positive.

2024: Rowling targets Scotland's new hate crime law

When Scotland's new Hate Crime and Public Order Act went into effect in April, Rowling tried to bait them into arresting her with posts online. The law criminalizes "stirring up hatred" against people based on their race, religion, disability, sexuality or gender identity. By passing the law, Scotland "placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls," Rowling said in the thread on X. If anything she wrote qualified as an offense under the new law, "I look forward to being arrested when I return to the birthplace of the Scottish Enlightenment," Rowling said.

2024: Rowling named in cyberbullying lawsuit

Shortly after winning the gold at the Olympics, Algerian boxer Imane Khelif filed a criminal complaint with French authorities alleging "acts of aggravated cyber harassment" that named Rowling and other high-profile figures, like tech billionaire Elon Musk, said a Variety exclusive. Khelif was targeted online for harassment over false claims about her gender after her opponent, Italian boxer Angela Carini, dropped out of their bout seconds into the match, declaring she "never felt a punch like this."

Rowling posted a photo from the fight, accusing Khelif of being a man who was "enjoying the distress of a woman he's just punched in the head."

2024: Rowling responds to Donald Trump's win

In response to comments on X accusing her of being far-right and of celebrating President-elect Donald Trump's recent win, Rowling referred back to an earlier post where she said the U.K. left had "f**ked up monumentally on gender identity ideology." Women like her "aren't and never have been far-right," she said in the post. "We simply want the left to wake the hell up because we're watching it do its utmost to alienate people it used to represent." She clarified that she was not saying that "Trump's win was down to the gender stuff," as she is "not an American voter, so can't judge." However, she pointed out that the Labour Party won the last U.K. election, and they have "embraced gender identity ideology whole-heartedly."

2024: Rowling attacks another athlete

Rowling joined a chorus of naysayers attacking Barbra Banda, a cisgender woman, after she was selected for the BBC's Women's Footballer of the Year. "Presumably, the BBC decided this was more time efficient than going door to door to spit directly in women's faces," the author said in a retweet of an article about Banda winning the award.

2024: Rowling insists trans kids do not exist

The author's latest public tiff was in response to an online critic who called out her "hateful focus" on trans kids as "hurtful and unnecessary." Rowling clapped back, saying there "are no trans kids" and that no child is "born in the wrong body," in a post on X. She went on to call out the adults around the kids, including parents, teachers and surgeons, that encouraged what she deemed harmful rhetoric about gender identity. These adults are "prepared to sacrifice the health of minors to bolster your belief in an ideology that will end up wreaking more harm than lobotomies and false memory syndrome combined," she said.

2025: Rowling celebrates U.K. Supreme Court ruling

In April, the United Kingdom's Supreme Court unanimously passed a ruling that limited the definition of a woman to be based on "biological sex" under Britain's Equality Act, excluding trans women from being protected from discrimination. In response to the ruling, Rowling gloated in several X posts celebrating "terfs" and referring to the ruling as "TERF VE Day," a "play on V-E Day, the formal end of World War II and Nazi occupation in Europe," said USA Today. She capped off the thread with a photo of herself drinking a cocktail and smoking a cigar, captioned "I love it when a plan comes together."

2025: Rowling launches fund for 'women's sex-based rights'

In May 2025, Rowling announced the launch of the J.K. Rowling Women's Fund, which "offers legal funding support to individuals and organizations fighting to retain women’s sex-based rights in the workplace, in public life and in protected female spaces," the fund's website said. Rowling is helming the fund with her own money (an unsurprising fact given that Forbes estimates her net worth at over $1 billion).

But controversy surrounds the fund, as many believe it is a "euphemism for the anti-trans' advocacy to which she has devoted herself and, seemingly, every waking hour of her life," said LGBTQ+ news outlet Them. This is also not the "first time that one of Rowling's organizations has made the exclusion of trans people a core part of its mission," as the outlet noted that Beira's Place, a rape and crisis center founded by Rowling in 2022, does "not hire or provide services to trans women."

2025: Rowling criticizes Potter director

In August 2025, Chris Columbus, who directed the first two "Harry Potter" films, told Variety that Rowling's stance on the LGBTQ+ community was "unfortunate. I certainly don't agree with what she's talking about. But it's just sad, it's very sad."

In a characteristic response, Rowling replied to Columbus on X. "Another man who once worked with me declares himself saddened by my beliefs on gender and sex, I thought it might be useful to compile a list for handy reference," Rowling said on the social media site, including a list of anti-transgender talking points.

2025: Rowling attacks another Potter actor

Several months after criticizing director Christopher Columbus, Rowling turned her ire toward Emma Watson, who starred as Hermione in the "Potter" films and has often been outspoken about human rights issues. Watson had previously lambasted Rowling indirectly for her anti-trans views, and offered a bit of further insight during a September podcast interview. "It's my deepest wish that I hope people who don't agree with my opinion will love me, and I hope I can keep loving people who I don't necessarily share the same opinion with," Watson said.

Rowling jabbed back, saying on X that Watson (and Radcliffe) "think our former professional association gives them a particular right — nay, obligation — to critique me and my views." Watson "has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is."

2025: British MP clashes with Rowling

The controversy over Rowling's stance has made its way into the halls of British government. Nadia Whittome, a member of the U.K.'s House of Commons, claimed that people like Rowling were funding anti-trans movements across the country.

"There are external forces funded by big money from Elon Musk to J.K. Rowling, but the Government isn’t standing up against that with a compassionate alternative," Whittome, a member of the LGBTQ+ community, said to The Mirror. It is "very sad, I feel very sorry for her, someone who was once a treasured children's author." Whittome urged people to "follow where the transphobia is coming from, it’s not coming from working class people, it’s trickling down from the top." Whittome and Rowling previously sparred on social media in 2024.

2025: Rowling blasts Glamour UK for honoring trans women

Rowling criticized Glamour UK after the magazine featured nine trans women on its "Women of the Year" list in October. The cover of the issue had the group posing in T-shirts and crop tops with the slogan "Protect the Dolls," a term of endearment used within the trans community to refer to trans women. Once again, Rowling took to X to express her displeasure, saying she "grew up in an era when mainstream women’s magazines told girls they needed to be thinner and prettier" but now they "tell girls that men are better women than they are." Glamour UK clapped back in their own X post: "Better luck next year Jo x."

2025: Rowling chimes in on the trans ban for UK's Girl Scouts

Rowling once again jumped online, this time to defend Girlguiding, the British equivalent of Girl Scouts, after the organization announced that trans girls would no longer be allowed to join. Someone posted, "Serious question. Who does this help?" referencing the ban. "Answer: it helps girls," Rowling replied in an X post on Dec. 3. It tells girls they "have the right to things of their own" and that "they have the right to say 'no.’" It also "reminds girls that the desires of boys do not supersede their feelings, their rights, their discomfort or their safety," Rowling added.

2026: Rowling's anti-trans views plague the new 'Harry Potter' TV series

A new television series based on the "Harry Potter" books is in production for HBO, but Rowling's controversial views and her reputation have clouded the project. Both HBO and the new cast have received backlash for working with Rowling due to her anti-trans posts. Actor John Lithgow called Rowling’s views on transgender rights "ironic and inexplicable," saying that the fallout from his decision to play Albus Dumbledore in the series "upsets me," while speaking on stage at Rotterdam film festival after a screening of his latest film, "Jimpa." People are "vehemently opposed to me having anything to do with this," he added. "But in Potter canon you see no trace of transphobic sensitivity." Lithgow has "never met" Rowling and said she is "not really involved in this production at all."

The depth of Rowling's involvement in the series has been a point of contention for many. Rowling said in the past that although she "worked closely with the extremely talented writers," she will not be writing any episodes. Network CEO Casey Bloys previously told reporters that Rowling was "very, very involved in the process" of selecting the showrunner and director of the show.

2026: Rowling signals support for IOC's ruling against trans athletes

Rowling celebrated the International Olympic Committee's decision to ban transgender women from competing in women's events at the Olympic games, praising the move in a post on X. The ruling by the IOC "means a welcome return to fair sport for women and girls," but she will "never forget the scandal of Paris 2024, when people who consider themselves supremely virtuous and progressive publicly cheered on men punching women," Rowling said.

She accompanied the post with a picture of Algerian boxer Imane Khelif, who previously named Elon Musk and Rowling in a lawsuit filed to French authorities over alleged "acts of aggravated cyber harassment" back in 2024.

Russian media have dismissed Paris 2024 as the "Olympics of hell" as political tensions threaten to overshadow the event.

"I thought the Olympic Games were about sport," Russian MP Mariya Butina told the BBC. "No longer," she said, because now it's "about politics, religion, everything".

Yet Moscow has been accused of stoking geopolitical and culture war tensions that boiled over during the last fortnight.

What did the commentators say?

The Paris Games have been "hijacked by culture wars between Russia and the west", said Nathalie Tocci in The Guardian. The "politicisation" began with the opening ceremony's rendition of a feast of Dionysus, which was "immediately confused" with Leonardo da Vinci's "The Last Supper". This caused "a furore among socially conservative groups worldwide" and the artistic director, Thomas Jolly, received death threats.

Then "all hell broke loose" after a viral disinformation campaign about Algerian boxer Imane Khelif's gender identity. The "false" claim that Khelif is a transgender athlete was "echoed by figures as prominent" as Donald Trump, Elon Musk, J.K. Rowling, and "legions of racist and antitransgender trolls on social media", wrote Bilel Nasiri for New Lines Magazine, putting her "unwittingly at the centre of Western culture wars".

But the issue of women's boxing is "part of a much wider Russian-led campaign against the west", said Tocci. Moscow has targeted the Games' organisers because they've "isolated Russia since its invasion of Ukraine". Cast out of the Games "as a pariah", Russia "appears to be hell-bent on hating on the international sporting tournament in Paris", said CNBC.

Russian media outlets, most of which are linked to the Russian state, have "appeared to revel in misfortunes and controversies" that have "sprung up during the competition". Some Moscow media figures have even described the few Russian athletes who have competed in Paris as "traitors", said Euronews.

Elsewhere, Taiwan's government spoke out over an incident at the men's doubles badminton final between players from Taiwan and China – a supporter had her sign reading "Let's go Taiwan" ripped from her hands and torn up. Taiwanese spectators and commentators said the incident brought geopolitics to the fore by highlighting "the tremendous pressure Taiwan has long faced from China", said VOA.

Taiwan is only allowed to participate in the Olympics and other international competitions under the name Chinese Taipei, said The Associated Press, and it cannot fly its own flag or play its national anthem. "Despite that," Taiwanese fans at the badminton final sang the anthem during the medal ceremony, "drawing a huge wave of support online".

Russia's exclusion also "led to speculation" that its agents may have been responsible for a series of railway sabotages that caused significant travel disruption on the opening day of the Games, said Simon Chadwick and Paul Widdop on The Conversation.

But as much as social media has been the forum for lots of cultural and geopolitical tension this summer, it has also "enabled some competitors to have their moment in the spotlight", said Forbes. "Rarely do the 'shooting' stars" of the Games get "much more than a passing mention", but "this certainly wasn't the case this year" as Kim Ye-ji and Yusuf Dikeç made the pistol shooting competitions a viral hit.

What next?

Attention now turns to future events and these are already being discussed in political terms. Describing the Paris opening ceremony as a "disgrace", Trump said that no such thing would be allowed to happen when the 2028 Summer Olympics convene in Los Angeles – "which he no doubt assumes will be under his watch as president", said Tocci.

Meanwhile, Indonesia's ambition to host the 2036 Olympics could "go up in flames" over geopolitics, said the South China Morning Post, because a "major hurdle" would be its "strained political ties with Israel". Last year, Indonesia was stripped of hosting rights for a major football tournament amid political controversy sparked by "high-level politicians opposing Israel's participation".

British readers have voted JK Rowling’s “Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone” as the greatest debut novel of all time.

A poll of 2,000 UK literary lovers, commissioned by Amazon.co.uk to launch its Kindle Storyteller Award, saw the 1997 first instalment of Rowling’s series take 31% of the vote. “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee and “The Hobbit” by JRR Tolkien were joint-second on the list with 26%, followed by “Carrie” by Stephen King (20%) and “Frankenstein” by Mary Shelley (18%).

The other novels to make the top 10 included: “Lord of the Flies” by William Golding (17%); “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” by Douglas Adams (16%); “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz” by L Frank Baum (15%); “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo” by Stieg Larsson (14%); and “Gone with the Wind” by Margaret Mitchell (14%).

Here we round-up what the book critics said in their reviews of the top 10 debut novels:

1. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (1997) by JK Rowling – 31%

Much like her star character, JK Rowling had a “wizardry inside”, said Michael Winerip in his 1999 review for The New York Times, and she “soared beyond her modest Muggle surroundings” to achieve something “quite special”. This first novel is “wonderful” and though “all this hocus-pocus” is “delightful”, the magic in the book is “not the real magic of the book”. Much like Roald Dahl, Rowling “has a gift for keeping the emotions, fears and triumphs of her characters on a human scale”, even while the supernatural is “popping out all over”.

£7.99; The Week Bookshop

2. To Kill a Mockingbird (1960) by Harper Lee – 26%

Author Harper Lee, an Alabaman, wrote her first novel with “all of the tactile brilliance” and none of the “preciosity” generally supposed to be “standard swamp-warfare issue” for Southern US writers, said TIME magazine in its original August 1960 review of “To Kill a Mockingbird”, under the headline “About Life & Little Girls”. The novel is an account of “an awakening to good and evil” and Lee’s prose has “an edge that cuts through cant”. She teaches the reader “an astonishing number of useful truths” about little girls and about Southern life.

£6.99; The Week Bookshop

3. The Hobbit (1937) by JRR Tolkien – 26%

Re-reading “The Hobbit” turned out to be “something of a revelation”, said The New Yorker’s Jon Michaud in his 2012 revisit of JRR Tolkien’s classic tale. The plot “couldn’t be simpler” – it is the “very essence” of an adventure story. Compared to the “Rings” trilogy, which has been “freighted with all kinds of real-world allegories”, “The Hobbit”, written before the Second World War, “belongs to a more appealingly innocent world”.

£7.99; The Week Bookshop

4. Carrie (1974) by Stephen King – 20%

Structurally, “Carrie” is a “really weird one”, said The Guardian’s James Smythe in his 2012 re-read of Stephen King’s first novel. Standard “Kingian third-person narrative voice” is interspersed with “extracts from other media” – newspaper reports, autobiographies of characters, transcripts of police interviews, “that sort of thing”. “Carrie” ended up being “quite a zeitgeisty novel” and while it’s not a structure that “entirely works”, it’s a “really good story”. As a debut novel, “it’s a fairly good piece of juvenilia”. As a statement of intent – “that intent being to write stories that deal with the weird, twisted and human in equal measure” – it’s “exceptional”.

£6.29; amazon.co.uk

5. Frankenstein (1818) by Mary Shelley – 18%

Not only is “Frankenstein” a book about a monster, “it is also a monster of a book”, said Hernan Diaz in The Paris Review. Like the creature created by the main protagonist, Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel is made up of “incongruent bits and pieces stitched up together”. The text is a “wonderful monstrosity” composed of several genres, texts, and voices “patched up into one weird creature”.

£5.99; The Week Bookshop

6. Lord of the Flies (1954) by William Golding – 17%

On the outside “Lord of the Flies” may appear to be “simply a story about boys trying to live on a deserted island”, said Aiman.A in The Guardian, but reading between the lines will allow the reader to “understand and appreciate” the “dark hints that make this story truly exciting and magnificent in every respect”. If you like your books to have “gripping and believable characters with a plot second to none”, then “Lord of the Flies” is for you.

£7.45; amazon.co.uk

7. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1979) by Douglas Adams – 16%

“Astonishingly”, it is more than 40 years since Douglas Adams published “The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy”, said Shamini Bundell on Nature. “Yet the themes of the book have hardly dated.” As ecosystems are “destroyed to make way for roads”, artificial intelligence threatens to get “seriously unruly” and the universe “continually reveals it’s a lot more complicated than we thought”, Adams’s satirical science-fiction classic and its “deadpan” surreality “never seem to fade”.

£9.99; The Week Bookshop

8. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (1900) by L Frank Baum – 15%

This “timeless classic” has been brought to life in “countless ways”, from Broadway performances to a Hollywood blockbuster, said Bianca Schulze on The Children’s Book Review. L Frank Baum created a “mesmerising” kingdom filled with “surreal creatures” and “fantastic beings” and it’s a book that has “everything a young avid reader could want”. This “action-packed, whimsical adventure” transports the mind to “another world full of excitement and wonderment”.

£4.99; amazon.co.uk

9. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2005) by Stieg Larsson – 14%

Posthumous debuts are “rare”, said Jonathan Gibbs in The Independent, “not least in the world of crime thrillers”, where publishers want “a brand for life, not an explosive one-off”. After Stieg Larsson presented “three completed books” to his publisher before he died in 2005, they have found “success across much of Europe”, which now “looks to Scandinavia” for its brutal murders. “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo”, the opening instalment of “The Millennium” trilogy, introduced a “classic odd-couple duo”: crusading financial journalist, Mikael Blomkvist, and a freelance private investigator, Lisbeth Salander.

£5.71; amazon.co.uk

10. Gone with the Wind (1936) by Margaret Mitchell – 14%

A story about “civil war, starvation, rape, murder, heartbreak and slavery”, Margaret Mitchell’s “Gone with the Wind” is “not necessarily a book one would associate with hope”, said Holly Watt in The Guardian. “And yet”, at the novel’s heart lies Scarlett O’Hara, “one of the most ruthlessly optimistic characters in literature”. In a story of “rarely remitting disaster”, the “relentless determination” of O’Hara “provides a useful lesson in never giving in”.

£7.35; amazon.co.uk

More than half a century after being written, Judy Blume’s Are you there God? It’s me Margaret is finally hitting the big screen.

First published in 1970, the coming-of-age novel drew widespread acclaim – and controversy – for its depiction of taboo themes including puberty and religion. The upcoming film adaption, which stars Abby Ryder Fortson as Margaret, sticks closely to the original story of a young girl whose mixed-faith family (Christian mother and Jewish father) moves from New York City to the suburbs in New Jersey.

Despite having sold around 90m books in total worldwide, it has taken Blume a lifetime to get a “‘Yes’ from Hollywood” for one of her works, said The New York Times’s entertainment reporter Nicole Sperling. But now that the US author’s fans are old enough to “take charge in the entertainment industry”, a “Blume-aissance is upon us”.

Who is Judy Blume?

Blume was born in 1938 and raised in New Jersey, and has described her upbringing as culturally Jewish. She graduated from New York University in 1961 with a degree in education, but did not begin writing until after she was married with two children, publishing her first book in 1969. Now aged 85, Blume lives with her third husband in Florida.

Her bibliography of more than 25 novels has earned Blume a reputation as “a trailblazing champion” of previously taboo topics such as “sexual curiosity in young readers”, said Flickering Myth. This willingness to tackle tricky issues is highlighted in new documentary film Judy Blume Forever, premiering on Prime Video this week, which “opens with Blume reading a passage about masturbation from her famed 1973 novel Deenie”.

Various political and social groups have objected to Blume’s novels, five of which featured on an American Library Association (AL) list of the top 100 most banned books of the 1990s. Her 1975 novel Forever was censored due to its depiction of teen sex and the use of birth control, and there have been frequent calls for bans on Are you there God? It’s me Margaret, for its frank portrayal of menstruation and negative take on some of the Christian characters.

“As one of the most widely banned authors in American history”, said Selome Hailu in Variety, Blume “has some opinions on censorship”. The author told the magazine that she does not “believe” in Puffin Books’ recent move to publish updated editions of Roald Dahl’s books.

And she told The Sunday Times that she backed J.K. Rowling “100%” – although Blume later clarified on Twitter that she was talking about the harassment faced by Rowling, writing: “I wholly support the trans community.”

Blume’s 1970 novel is finally hitting mainstream cinemas as debate around book bans rages in the US. She recently told BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg that intolerance on issues ranging from gender and sexuality to race was now “worse than it was in the 80s”.

“It’s just reaching a point where again we have to fight back, we have to stand up and fight,” Blume said.

Journey to the big screen

Blume’s cinematic ambitions stretch back decades. Forever was turned into a 1978 made-for-television film but, for the most part, “there have been a lot of almosts, a lot of maybes”, Blume told The New York Times in 2004.

The writer and her son, filmmaker Lawrence Blume, adapted her 1972 novel Otherwise Known as Sheila the Great into a short movie that aired on ABC in 1991. Four years later, a TV series based on Fudge-a-Mania debuted on US TV.

Other opportunities have come and gone. Blume rewrote a Deenie script for Disney in 2004, “only to have it fall by the wayside when the studio switched its attention toward blockbusters”, said the paper’s Sperling. An adaptation of 1981’s Tiger Eyes was released in 2012, “but it didn’t do much to move the needle, grossing only $27,000 on tepid reviews”.

“I don’t know why things never worked,” Blume told Sperling. “Eventually you just say, ‘Eh, you know, let me write my books.’”

With the movie version of Are you there God? It’s me Margaret, which hits UK cinemas on 19 May, Blume is finally getting the Hollywood recognition that she has coveted for so many years. But when it comes to her “legacy”, Blume said that her ultimate goal was to have “touched lives”.

Blume has already “shaped the minds of millions”, said Hadley Freeman in The Sunday Times. More than any other author, she has taught kids about masturbation, menstruation and sex.

“Most of all,” wrote Freeman, “she taught them that it’s fine to be exactly what they are: ordinary kids.”

New Harry Potter video game Hogwarts Legacy is flying off shop shelves despite calls for a boycott of the new release.

After winning global fame as the author of the hit book series, J.K. Rowling has “fallen from beloved to beleaguered” in recent years over her outspoken views on transgender women, said Newsweek. The 2020 unveiling of a Hogwarts Legacy trailer prompted debate about whether Rowling's attachment to the game would “prove to be problematic” – despite her having no direct involvement.

But despite many gamers and members of the LGBTQ+ community calling for a boycott, others argued that “choosing to play the game doesn’t automatically mean they support the author's statements”, said the BBC’s gaming reporter Steffan Powell.

That argument appears to have won the day, with the new title – the first open-world action game set in the Hogwarts wizarding universe – topping the sales lists on Steam, Epic Store and Amazon even before its official release on Friday.

J.K. Rowling controversy

Rowling’s stance on trans people has “alienated large swaths of her fanbase” and “fanned the flames of an already red-hot debate”, said entertainment journalist Erik Kain on Forbes. But Hogwarts Legacy can be viewed as “a victory for the LGBTQ community and for progress”, Kain argued, as it features a “prominent trans character” and also “allows you to play as a trans protagonist”.

All the same, said The New Statesman, many fans have felt “unable to ignore” Rowling’s comments on trans women and her connection to the game as the creator of this wizarding world.

In January, one of the voice actors in the game, Sebastian Croft, tweeted: “I was cast in this project over three years ago, back when all Harry Potter was to me was the magical world I grew up with. This was long before I was aware of JK Rowling’s views. I believe wholeheartedly that trans women are women and trans men are men.”

Some gaming forums, such as ResetEra, have banned all mentions of Hogwarts Legacy, while some sites, such as The Game, have decided not to review the new title despite the potential resulting “revenue loss”.

Failed boycotts

The pushback against the video game is far from the first brand boycott that has failed.

Sales of Nike products jumped by 31% after the company faced criticism for appointing American football quarterback-turned-activist Colin Kaepernick as its spokesperson in 2018. Some consumers posted footage on social media showing them destroying Nike products over the choice of Kaepernick, who popularised the act of “taking a knee” at football games to protest against racial inequality.

Donald Trump joined in the online criticism, but the then president “inadvertently helped out” Nike, said NBC, by “drawing more attention” to the brand, which ultimately helped to boost sales.

Trump was also at the centre of another backlash against a company in the US in 2020. Sales of products made by Goya Foods soared by 22% after social media users called for a boycott in response to CEO Robert Unanue praising the Republican politician.

Fast-food chain Chik-fil-A has also been a target of boycotts and negative press, as a result of the anti-LGBTQ+ stance of its owners. A decision in 2011 by a Chick-fil-A outlet in Pennsylvania to donate food to a marriage seminar conducted by the Pennsylvania Family Institute, “a group known for its anti-gay advocacy, prompted a nationwide boycott of the chain”, said Vox.

But overall, the bad press and boycotts did little harm. According to latest figures, Chik-fil-A was the third-largest fast-food chain in the US by sales in 2021.

Trans activists are calling for a boycott of a new Harry Potter game set to be released in February in response to J.K. Rowling’s views on gender ideology.

Hogwarts Legacy is expected to be “one of the blockbuster games of the year” when it goes on sale on 10 February, reported The Times.

But the build-up to its release has sparked calls by some gamers to avoid it, despite Warner Bros Games insisting it is inclusive and the game’s website stating that the Harry Potter author was “not involved in the creation of the game”.

‘Any support is harmful’

YouTuber and journalist Jessie Earl was one of several trans activists to voice opposition, arguing that “any support of something like Hogwarts Legacy is harmful”. Earl’s tweet provoked a response from Rowling, who said such “purethink is incompatible with owning ANYTHING connected with me, in ANY form”.

Rowling has attracted widespread criticism from trans groups since a series of tweets in June 2020 in which she responded to a headline on an online article discussing “people who menstruate”. “I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”

Rowling denied she was transphobic and said she stood by her comments, saying: “It isn’t hate to speak the truth.”

She has since been outspoken on the topic, most recently branding Nicola Sturgeon a “destroyer of women’s rights” over the passing of the Scottish government’s Gender Recognition Bill, said The Herald.

The author was also critical of the Scottish first minister over “the jailing in a women’s prison of a trans woman who was convicted of rape”, said The Times. Rowling tweeted: “Deeply amused by those telling me I’ve lost their admiration due to the disrespect I show violent, duplicitous rapists.”

Will Overgard, a US gamer, said that by supporting Hogwarts Legacy “you are essentially aligning yourself with some really heinous transphobic values”. He argued for a complete boycott of the game, which lets players take the role of a student at Hogwarts, in a video that has been viewed two million times.

One leading gaming forum, ResetEra, has banned discussion of Hogwarts Legacy altogether, and accused Rowling of “pushing transphobic legislation”, said the Daily Mail.

‘We know it’s a diverse audience’

When the game’s voiceover cast was announced, Sebastian Croft, a British actor who worked on the LGBT Netflix series Heartstopper, also faced a backlash. “I was cast in this project over three years ago, back when all Harry Potter was to me was the magical world I grew up with,” he said. “This was long before I was aware of JK Rowling’s views. I believe wholeheartedly that trans women are women and trans men are men.”

The game’s director, Alan Tew, has maintained that the game is inclusive, with players able to play as trans wizards and witches. “We know that’s a diverse audience. For us, it’s making sure that the audience, who always dreamed of having this game, had the opportunity to feel welcomed back,” he told IGN.

Warner Bros Games told fans in September 2020 that Rowling “is not directly involved in the creation of the game” – although her team did reportedly collaborate in its making, said The Times.

However, since the premise of Hogwarts Legacy is based on Rowling’s work and intellectual property, “she is sure to receive royalties”, reported Newsweek. “Multiple sources have cited that Rowling earns anywhere between $50 million to a $100 million each year from royalties.”

Despite the uproar, according to Newsweek, forecasters continue to predict that the game will sell well, and pre-release sales seem to confirm this.

J.K. Rowling has hit back at a mocking tweet by Society of Authors chair Joanne Harris by accusing her of “betrayal”.

Harris, author of 1999 bestselling novel Chocolat, posted a Twitter poll asking whether other writers had “ever received a death threat (credible or otherwise)” on Saturday. This was shortly after Rowling received a death threat for tweeting her outrage at the stabbing of Salman Rushdie.

In response, Rowling told The Times that trans rights advocate Harris had “consistently failed” to defend female authors who disagreed “with her personal position on gender identity ideology”, and allowed women to be intimidated into silence.

What did Harris say?

The row erupted after Rowling tweeted her support for Rushdie after he was seriously injured in an attack in New York on Friday. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter series, received a message that said “don't worry, you are next”.

Harris then tweeted her death threats poll, with the response options being “Yes”, “Hell, yes”, “No, never” and “Show me, dammit”.

The tone of the Twitter poll, said the Daily Mail, suggested that the Society of Authors chair had some “scepticism” over “how serious the threats were”.

How has Rowling responded?

Rowling told The Times that she had “received no communication whatsoever from Harris expressing sympathy for the death and rape threats I’ve received”.

She added that Harris had “consistently failed to criticise tactics designed to silence and intimidate women who disagree with her personal position on gender identity ideology and has said publicly, ‘Cancel isn’t a dirty word. We habitually cancel things we no longer want.’

“I find it impossible to square the society’s stated position on freedom of speech with Harris’s public statements over the past two years and stand in solidarity with all female writers in the UK who currently feel betrayed by their professional body and its leader,” said Rowling, who has faced widespread condemnation over her views on gender identity.

Harris fired back that she was “wholly against threats of any kind, to anyone, regardless of their politics, opinions or views. That includes J.K. Rowling, or anyone whose opinions I might sometimes disagree with.

“Some of you may have noticed the volume of harassment I get on a regular basis from certain gender-critical people. This is entirely because I signed a letter supporting trans rights three years ago. I still support trans rights. The same people are behind this latest stunt.”

In a series of tweets Harris said she had deleted the poll as she felt she had “got the tone wrong”, and replaced it with a new version as she felt it is “important to see the extent of this problem”.

On Sunday afternoon, a group of women gathered for lunch – and proceeded to break the internet. The event was organised by J.K. Rowling and the attendees were all women’s rights campaigners who have been accused of holding transphobic or gender critical beliefs.

The boozy lunch took place at the River Café, an exclusive Michelin-star restaurant in Hammersmith, west London. It had initially been planned for pre-Christmas, but was rearranged due to the high Covid infection rates at the time.

The event followed the launch of a women’s rights campaign called Respect My Sex if you want my X, which “encourages voters to ask politicians for their views on sex and gender identity”, said The Times.

Although Rowling had booked a private room, there was nothing secretive about the gathering. Many of the attendees took to Twitter to share photos of themselves hugging and laughing, with Helen Joyce, the author of Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality, tweeting that it was “a truly joyous celebration of sisterhood”.

Who was there?

Guests included journalist and feminist activist Julie Bindel, who co-founded the campaigning organisation Justice for Women, and Rosie Duffield, the Labour MP for Canterbury, who has been at the forefront of her party’s internal tensions over the conflict between women’s and trans rights.

Also in attendance was Kathleen Stock, the feminist philosopher who resigned from her post at Sussex University over her views on gender, and Maya Forstater, who famously lost her job in 2019 after tweeting about the difference between sex and gender identity.

The event on Sunday was the first time Rowling and Forstater had met, but it was Forstater’s case that propelled the Harry Potter author’s gender critical beliefs into the spotlight. In 2019, Rowling was accused of transphobia after she tweeted “IStandWithMaya” in support of Forstater’s employment battle.

Forstater told The Times that it had been “emotional” to meet the writer, whom she described as her “source of strength”.

Journalist Suzanne Moore, who also attended the gathering, wrote in The Telegraph: “I have now read several accounts as to why [the lunch] took place. We must be a coven, or launching a campaign or plotting.”

But the “actual reason”, she continued, was “to eat, drink and be extremely merry, which seems never to have occurred to these steely investigative reporters”.

Trans demonstration

Pink News pointed out that the lunch took place at the same time as a trans rights demonstration outside Downing Street in protest at the government’s decision to exclude transgender people from a UK conversion therapy ban.

“Although Rowling once promised her trans followers that she would ‘march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans’, she was nowhere to be seen on the day of the protests,” added the publication.

1. Why do we still care so much about what JK Rowling has to say?

Ryan Coogan at The Independent

on a ‘new brand’

About once a month, Ryan Coogan logs on to Twitter “to see another hashtag accusing JK Rowling of bigotry against trans people, accompanied by the obligatory counter-hashtag defending her position”. Writing at The Independent, he says the author has made “a long line of questionable remarks”, and says her “position on trans identity is at once both reasonably stated and quietly troubling”. Discussion on the topic “is in many ways her new brand”. He continues: “Here is a woman whose career was built on the most popular and successful good versus evil allegory of the past century, appearing to show her hand as a potential force for the latter.” For the people she inspired, it is “hard not to try and fight back against the erosion of ideals” they were taught to champion in her own books. “Even if it’s just with a hashtag.”

Read more

2. Russian cities are returning to their Cold War state

Robert Ginzburg at The Spectator

on a Western exodus

“In Russia, the lights are going out one by one,” Robert Ginzburg writes at The Spectator. “Everything one expects from an up-to-date country – cashpoints that work, Apple products, Coca-Cola – is vanishing.” Ginzburg says that “so much of the normality of living in a Russian city comes from the Western chain-stores”. Forget that there are “creepy combat-shops” or the police there to frighten you, there’s the same “H&M sweater they’re wearing in Zurich”, you can “eat the same IKEA meatballs”, and “make the same flatpack gingerbread house as children everywhere”. Queues stretched round the block when the first McDonald’s opened in 1990, and “that was when you knew the Cold War was really over”. Now, without McDonald’s and Coke, “Russia will be forced to home-grow its own substitutes. Look out for restaurants with names like ‘Mig Mag’, ‘Nuggetsi’ and ‘McFlarri’,” he says.

Read more

3. From warlords to dementia wards, never underestimate the transformative power of music

Jane Shilling at The Telegraph

on a ‘formidable superpower’

Baroness Sally Greengross “has urged” the government to acknowledge “the transformative power of music” in a proposed amendment to the Health and Social Care Bill. As well as being a crossbench peer, Greengross is chief executive of a think tank on ageing, which recently coordinated a report “setting out the evidence for music as a valuable therapy for the symptoms of people living with dementia”. Schoolchildren too can benefit from a music curriculum, but it isn’t “the only art with the power to unite us across generations and nations”. Vladimir Putin’s ally, “the Chechen warlord Ramzen Kadyrov, has reportedly pleaded with Boris Johnson to lift sanctions on him” so he can visit the National Portrait Gallery in London. When “a bad man turns to culture to make his argument, it reinforces the case for the arts” as “a formidable superpower, transcending age, language, history and mental capacity”.

Read more

4. Kids learned more words during lockdown compared to before the pandemic

Miriam Stoppard at The Mirror

on new vocabulary

“One by one, the long-term effects of Covid are revealing themselves,” writes Miriam Stoppard at The Mirror. Some are physical, but “one of the more serious” may be affecting young children “who suffered isolation during the lockdowns”. New research has found that “children who were read to more frequently during lockdown learned more words – relative to their peers who were read to less”. Equally unsurprising, perhaps, those children who had “increased screen time” during lockdowns said fewer words than those children who had less screen time. But “importantly”, says Stoppard, “while children were exposed to more screen time during lockdown than before, overall they gained more words than expected”. This is due, she says, to “other activities parents and carers did with children”. That at least, says Stoppard, is “reassuring”.

Read more

5. Naive, narcissistic, unhinged: bad friends are my vice, and I can’t give them up

Eli Goldstone at The Guardian

on relationship ruptures

Eli Goldstone ended a friendship two years ago. It might have been “sensible” to tell them they were “no longer serving” her needs, but instead “I swore at them over WhatsApp and didn’t respond to their messages ever again”, she writes at The Guardian. Goldstone says she “has a tendency to put up with some particularly bad friendships for much longer than is necessary”, and she’d reached “breaking point”. Close friends “have their ups and downs”, but “a bad friend is something else entirely”. She used to think she “was attracted to complex, challenging, or unsatisfying friendships because I have imagination and empathy”, and there was “a lot at stake, emotionally”. But “bad friends tend to demand a lot of support” and they can “reflect many of my worst qualities back at me”, she continues. But she recognises that she too is “almost certainly somebody else’s bad friend”.

Read more

The name of the real-life version of the sport played on flying broomsticks in the Harry Potter series is to be changed in a bid to distance the game from J.K. Rowling.

US Quidditch (USQ) and Major League Quidditch (MLQ) said in a joint statement that the name change would help cut ties with the bestselling author, who “has increasingly come under scrutiny for her anti-trans positions in recent years”.

The governing bodies said the real-life quidditch has “developed a reputation as one of the most progressive sports in the world on gender equality and inclusivity”, in part because of a “gender maximum rule” that requires teams to have no more than four players of the same sex on the field at a time. “Both organisations feel it is imperative to live up to this reputation in all aspects of their operations and believe this move is a step in that direction,” USQ and MLQ added.

“British governing body QuidditchUK has said it backs the name change in principle,” reported The Independent. However, the International Quidditch Association (IQA) said it had “no plans” to change the name “at this time”.

In a statement on Saturday, the global government body added that the IQA “has no tolerance for transphobia or bigotry of any kind” and that its members “explicitly disavow” Rowling’s comments against the transgender community.

Co-adapter ‘thrilled’

Quidditch was first played as a real-life sport at Middlebury College in Vermont in 2005, before spreading to colleges and universities worldwide including Cambridge and Bristol.

Alex Benepe, who jointly co-adapted the game from the fantasy series for Middlebury College, said he was “thrilled” that USQ and MLQ were exploring other name options. “I've been a strong advocate for making this move for a long time,” he added.

The process to select a new name for the sport has begun and the leagues will be surveying players over the next few months to help make the decision. According to The Times, the options include “quickball, quicker, quidstrike and quadraball”.

Distancing of film cast

Rowling has repeatedly come under fire over the past couple of years for expressing views, often on Twitter, that her critics have described as transphobic. In June 2020, the author published an open letter on her website explaining why she felt “worried about the new trans activism” and expressing “deep concerns” about the effect of the trans rights movement on education and safeguarding.

Since the publication of the letter, core cast members from the Harry Potter films including Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Evanna Lynch and Katie Leung have publicly distanced themselves from Rowling. Daniel Radcliffe, who starred as Harry, issued a statement saying that “we need to do more to support transgender people and non-binary people, not invalidate their identities and cause further harm”.

The Daily Mail reported last month that “cast and crew of the Harry Potter movies are coming together for a reunion, with one notable exception”. Rowling was not invited to take part HBO’s upcoming special Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return to Hogwarts, premiering on New Year’s Day, and instead “will be shown in archival footage about the movies”, said Variety.

“Rowling has become a figure of instant, and seemingly permanent, controversy in the passionate and vast Harry Potter fandom,” the showbusiness-focused newspaper added.

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Eric Kaufmann, professor of politics at Birkbeck, University of London, on UnHerd

on why the ‘Jordan Peterson generation’ is so conservative

Are young people turning to the Right?

“Something unusual is happening among Britain’s youngest voters, known as Generation Z or the Zoomers. Increasingly, those under the age of 22 seem to be diverging from voters aged between 22 and 39, and appear considerably more conservative, to the point where today’s 18-year-olds are about as right-wing as 40 year-olds. How might this be explained? Are Zoomers just more irreverent, reacting against their politically-correct older siblings? Or is it that Britain’s newest voters are simply too young to have been shaped by the Brexit shock? Whatever the explanation, in the immediate post-Brexit years the youngest voters were 40 points more liberal than the oldest. Today they are only 20 points more to the Left.”

2. Rafael Behr in The Guardian

on the state of a loveless union

A Scottish independence crisis is on its way – and English politics is in denial

“Downing Street’s Plan A to dampen the clamour for independence was hosing Scotland with public money, but competition for that resource is getting more intense and areas with Conservative MPs are the priority. If there is no sign of a Tory revival north of the border, an even more cynical path might appeal: letting the flames of resentment roar in Scotland, igniting a Johnson-supporting English nationalist backlash. All the better if that sustains the toxic question of whether Labour needs SNP MPs to support a coalition come a general election. It would take an exceptionally irresponsible prime minister on a streak of constitutional pyromania to pursue such tactics. Johnson is qualified. A conflagration in Scotland might not be the next crisis to destabilise Britain, but it is in the queue. It is also unnerving how little England is prepared, when Scottish politics is a rolling rehearsal. That bodes ill for the pro-union cause.”

3. Sophia Akram in The Independent

on the UK’s Magnitsky Act

If Britain wants to lead on human rights, it should start with its own citizens

“If Britain wants to be seen as a leading defender of human rights, perhaps it should start with the very same Brits it disowned and left to wallow amid the chaos of civil conflict or as pawns in a political game. Tauqir Sharif, a British aid worker who was stripped of his citizenship last year, is a case in point. Last year, the British government claimed he was aligned with groups aligned with Al Qaeda and deemed him too much a national security risk to return to Britain, which he denied. Yet the decision continued against him while leaving him in the dark about all of the evidence in question, because citizenship revocation appeals allow for the government to draw on intelligence heard in secret... This two-tier system now hangs as a guillotine over the heads of immigrant children and naturalised citizens as it denies them the same recourse as other citizens in the UK. Do people like Sharif deserve it?”

4. Nina Power, senior lecturer in philosophy at Roehampton University, in The Daily Telegraph

on an art scene ‘set against freedom of speech’

JK Rowling’s treatment is a grim sign of how Twitter mobs have poisoned our cultural life

“I myself have been cancelled quite a few times now, had a fellow co-panellist refuse even to look at me or listen to my talk (after she tried to get me banned from the event, much to the bemusement of the organisers). I’ve been picketed and had one institution decide to pay for security guards to protect me. I’ve had former friends write untrue and horrendous things about me in public in an attempt to smear me – and all for suggesting on Facebook that the Labour Party might have a problem with women raising questions about proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act, and for refusing to accept the terms of a small number of people regarding who we can and can’t talk to. When you ask to talk to your cancellers face-to-face, they always, of course, refuse. It appears to me that contemporary culture is screwed, and not only by the virus. After plagues, there are often periods of great artistic flourishing. Perhaps we’re on the cusp of this, but it’s not going to come from these cowardly institutions, more concerned to avoid bad publicity than they are in understanding the world.”

5. Thomas B. Edsall in The New York Times

on the partisanship of the Trump era

How Could Human Nature Have Become This Politicized?

“The intensifying differences between the two parties, particularly over matters of race, sex and the family have created a fertile environment for what amounts to the partisan politicization of human nature... The electorate has been divided into two separate camps based on voters’ preference for key foundational moral principles and the policies that derive from them, their social and cultural identities, and their preference for democratic or illiberal leadership. Politicians understand this intuitively, which means that even as Donald Trump is convinced that chaos, confusion and conflict will enhance his prospects for re-election, Joe Biden is working to quell the fires that Trump is lighting.”

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Hugo Rifkind in The Times

on Brits not getting the social distancing memo

In-your-face rulebreakers are out of control

“We are all free to risk our own health by overdrinking or overeating or overscubadiving, or whatever, but responsible behaviour in a pandemic is not just about us. It speaks to a sort of social responsibility that is, or at least should be, literally step one in civilised behaviour... I had dared to dream that the pandemic might have changed that. Back in April, you might recall, people kept saying it had. Covid is a unique crisis but it is also the template for every crisis, from tax avoidance, to funding health and social care, to the big looming horror of environmental collapse. Over and again, I read that this crisis was a dress rehearsal and a test, and that humanity was on a learning curve. We are all each other, all intertwined, all responsible for attuning our own behaviour for the greater good. What a shame, though, that we keep forgetting.”

2. Paul Harrison, Downing Street press secretary under Theresa May, in The Guardian

on Downing Street’s plans for televised lobby briefings

No 10 is changing the way it does politics - and it's a major risk

“Press briefings – like newspapers – work best when the people involved have something to say. Inevitably, there will be days when No 10 doesn’t have a big announcement, and some of them will coincide with moments of real political pressure. While there’s a certain skill in saying little that makes news during a bad week (under the last prime minister we described those weeks as ‘sporty’ or, when people started resigning, ‘choppy’), it definitely won’t look tremendous on television. That is where format will be crucial. At the moment, behind closed doors, there’s nothing to stop the lobby asking the same question 100 times in their briefings (there’s usually an inverse relationship between how many times a question gets asked and how much they like the answer). Artfully dodging a question once is one thing – but refusing to answer the same question 10 times is another. Whether the new system operates more like a press conference – one outlet, one question – or the current free-for-all, will affect the public’s impressions a lot.”

3. Matrim Tait in The Independent

on the enforcing of restrictive gender stereotypes

JK Rowling’s tweets perfectly illustrate the ‘gender critical’ fixation with using gay issues against trans people

“Counter to Rowling’s assertion to the contrary, the ideas espoused by the gender-critical movement aim to persuade trans people that they are not trans, which is, in fact, a form of conversion therapy. This is because gender, much like sexuality, is innate and it is impossible and cruel to attempt to force trans children to conform to the gender they were assigned at birth. Organisations such as The Trevor Project include attempts to change gender identity in their definition of conversion therapy, because forcing people to deny their very identities, utilising a range of invasive and damaging methods, is wrong. Supporting trans children, therefore, is actually the opposite of this harmful practice. Gay children have been subjected to horrific abuse through so-called ‘reparative’ therapy. Conflating this abuse with the legitimate medical guidelines set by experts far more knowledgeable than her in this particular field trivialises a practice many are still fighting to make illegal in the UK.”

4. Imran Ahmed, CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, in The Daily Telegraph

on the billion-dollar anti-vaxx industry

It’s time the tech giants cracked down on the anti-vaxx infodemic

“Social platforms chose not to alienate an anti-vaxx user base that we estimate is worth up to $1 billion a year to them. Some platforms have even broken their own promises by profiting directly from anti-vaxx content. In one mind-boggling case, we found that an advert from the pro-vaccine Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation was being displayed on anti-vaxx content on YouTube, while Facebook’s Ads Library reveals that it has accepted money for anti-vaxx adverts. All of this powers a vast anti-vaxx ecosystem. It includes anti-vaxx campaigns funded by a tiny number of millionaires that have been pumping out misinformation on every social media platform for over a decade in some cases... All of these actors exploit the spaces provided by Facebook groups in order to turn vaccine sceptics into die-hard anti-vaxxers. It’s now time to bring the anti-vaxx industry to heel before it’s too late.

5. Anna Sauerbrey in The New York Times

on the long reign of Mutti Merkel

How Germany Fell Back in Love With Angela Merkel

“Before the pandemic, with a healthy economy and the government boasting a surplus of €19 billion, over $21 billion, Ms. Merkel was criticized for not doing enough. She wasn’t leading her country and Europe; she was merely managing them. The criticism now seems excessive. As Germany held its breath during those terrifying weeks of lockdown, it saw Angela Merkel afresh. No longer overcautious and hesitant, she was instead the duteous and utterly capable leader who was there when her country needed her most. Not that she seems to care much about her new popularity. ‘When you’re in politics,’ she said last month, ‘you just have to adjust to new realities and situations. That’s our job.’”

Four authors signed to the same literary agency as J.K. Rowling have resigned over the company’s failure to publicly support transgender rights.

Drew Davies, Fox Fisher and Ugla Stefania Kristjonudottir Jonsdottir say that they asked The Blair Partnership to speak out after the Harry Potter author aired her views on transgenderism earlier this month, but that the agency had not committed “to any action that we thought was appropriate and meaningful”.

Announcing their resignations along with that of a fourth author who wished to remain anonymous, the group said they were “saddened and disappointed it has come to this”.

The decision comes after staff at Rowling’s publisher, Hachette UK, threatened to refuse to work on her latest book in protest at her comments on trans issues.

What did the authors say?

In a statement published online, Davies, Fisher and Jonsdottir say: “Freedom of speech can only be upheld if the structural inequalities that hinder equal opportunities for underrepresented groups are challenged and changed.

“Affirmations to support LGBTQIA people as a whole need to be followed up by meaningful and impactful action, both internally and publicly. As LGBTQIA writers ourselves we feel strongly about having an agency that supports our rights at all avenues, and does not endorse views that go against our values and principles.”

Has Rowling’s legacy been tarnished?

By airing her views on trans issues, Rowling is “upending her legacy piece by piece”, says The Washington Post’s Molly Roberts.

As her readers have grown older, they have discovered that the real world is more nuanced than the wizarding world built by Rowling, argues Roberts.

“They’ve discovered that there aren’t only Gryffindors and Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws and Slytherins; that life is complicated in all sorts of ways, and not so conducive to archetyping... Gender doesn’t reduce so easily to the binary Rowling raised an era’s worth of children on,” she continues.

For Vogue writer Raven Smith, the row has triggered nothing short of the “erosion of the Harry Potter franchise”.

“It’s not the loss of readers, nor commerce (J.K. can take the financial hit), but the foundations of the world she built for us suddenly feel unsteady,” says Smith, who adds that “at its heart, Potter is a saga of equality”.

“J.K. took on the systemic oppression of minorities - the racism against Mudbloods - and pioneered tolerance, regardless of where you were born and who your parents are. We suspended disbelief in the dragons and headless ghosts and Horcruxes, but the message simmering at the bottom of the caldron was unifying because it was love.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Has the controversy harmed Rowling’s sales?

There is no evidence to suggest that the row has damaged Rowling’s book sales so far.

But according to Variety magazine, Rowling’s tweets on trans issues make the future of the Fantastic Beasts spin-off film series “as precarious as the Defence Against the Dark Arts teaching position at Hogwarts”.

Even before the controversy erupted, the movies were in danger owing to waning box-office receipts, according to an article published on The Conversation in March by marketing experts from Australian universities.

The first Fantastic Beasts film performed solidly, grossing $814m (£653m) worldwide, but the sequel made just $654m (£524m) - the worst box-office take of all the movies set in the Harry Potter universe.

“Subsequent questions have been raised about how the third planned film will perform, let alone the rest of the five-film series that had previously been mooted,” wrote the academics.

And ticket sales at Harry Potter theme parks and for the Harry Potter and the Cursed Child theatre production have also dropped, they added.

With an estimated net worth of £795m, according to the latest Sunday Times Rich List, Rowling should be able to withstand a drop in income.

However, a question mark remains over whether parents will still want to read her stories to their children.

For The Telegraph’s Alice Vincent, the answer is simple: Rowling’s “joyous legacy may be sullied, but the magic of Harry Potter will endure”.

The Week’s daily round-up highlights the five best opinion pieces from across the British and international media, with excerpts from each.

1. Jemima Lewis in The Daily Telegraph

on the need for black and white answers in 21st century politics

Nuance is no good in this age of self-righteous identity politics

“The word ‘gaslighting’ derives from a 1938 play by Patrick Hamilton about a sinister and controlling husband, but has been popularised more recently as part of the new lexicon of social justice. It means to manipulate a person using psychological trickery until they begin to question their own sanity. It’s funny, because I feel increasingly gaslit by the very generation that so rightly abhors this behaviour. Like the befuddled wife in Hamilton’s play, I am almost afraid to trust the evidence of my own senses. Things that once seemed, and still seem, self-evident facts have now been recast as faulty thinking, with no room for nuance or disagreement. Anyone who persists in clinging to wrong thoughts is ridiculed, threatened, berated and ostracised: a perfect template of the gaslighter’s art.”

2. Clemence Michallon in The Independent

on the issues J.K. Rowling failed to mention

J.K. Rowling, predatory men and the nuance we're all missing out

“Predatory men aren’t waiting for anyone’s permission. That’s… kind of their thing, really. In the hypothetical world described by Rowling, predatory men are eagerly waiting to be granted access to bathrooms to finally assault as many women and girls as they want. But here’s the thing: if someone’s predatory tendencies are such that they have decided to attack women and/or girls in public bathrooms, what makes us think that they’re currently being held back by some kind of rule keeping them out of the premises? This makes no sense. It also has nothing - absolutely nothing - to do with trans people or their rights... In the meantime, I will say this: trans rights are human rights. Someone’s struggle doesn’t come at the expense of your own. And for heaven’s sake, let people use the bathroom in peace.”

3. Philip Collins in The Times

on tips from abroad for the prime minister

How Boris Johnson can fix the schools crisis

“The process of recovery needs some dramatic and specific attention. In some cases, the rules about a child repeating a year could be relaxed. It may be better for some children simply to begin the year over again. As unpopular as testing is, it is vital. All children who are beginning secondary school in the autumn should be tested, to assess what maths and English help they may need. Once the need is defined, the best way to help is to give pupils individual tuition and mentoring. The government should establish a national tutoring service with help targeted in maths and in English, offered in the final year of primary school and the first years of secondary school, the critical phase for learning. Lee Elliot Major, professor of social mobility at Exeter University, has shown that good tuition can boost a child’s learning by the equivalent of five months during a single academic year... It is astonishing that, months into this crisis, there is no evident plan. The education secretary seems to have spent lockdown sitting at home alone doing nothing more than cause trouble for himself. It’s not that hard to work out what must be done and not impossible to do it.”

4. Simukai Chigudu, associate professor of African politics at the University of Oxford, in The Guardian

on the years-long campaign to topple a controversial statue

As one of Oxford’s few black professors, let me tell you why I care about Rhodes

“[Cecil] Rhodes’ imperialism gave rise to a pattern of settler colonialism in Southern Africa predicated on racial domination in political, economic and social spheres. In Rhodesia, 8 million disenfranchised black people eked out a living at subsistence level or below it, while 250,000 white people, barely 3% of the population, owned more than half of the country’s available land, and virtually all of its business and industry, before independence from colonial rule in 1980. Education, healthcare and housing were all segregated, with white people enjoying levels equivalent to those in western Europe or the United States. Rhodes’ statue, then, is no mere physical artefact. It is imbued with a noxious history. Its presence at Oriel College reframes Rhodes’ conquest as munificence to the university and fails to recognise the exploitation of African labour from which his estate was built. It belongs in a museum, where it can be properly historicised. More importantly, in 2015 and now, the calls for the removal of such statues open up discussions about how we talk about the dynamics of race and racism, inclusion and exclusion, and being and belonging in Britain.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

5. David Studdert, Matthew Miller and Garen Wintemute in The New York Times

on a post-corona crisis that has been brewing for decades

Coronavirus Could Make America’s Gun Problem Even Deadlier

“Millions of Americans have experienced the coronavirus pandemic directly, as they or their loved ones suffered through infection. But for most of us, the experience is defined by weeks and months on end stuck at home. The shut-ins are testing the safety of our home environments. Stress and isolation combined with another feature of American life - easy access to firearms - could form a deadly brew... Several myths cloud public understanding of the connection between guns and suicide. Perhaps the most pernicious is the idea that people who really want to end their lives will find a way to do it, making the presence or absence of a gun somewhat irrelevant. Decades of research on suicide tell a different story. Suicide attempts are often impulsive, prompted by fleeting crises. A vast majority of people who attempt suicide survive and do not go on to die in a future suicide. But whether attempters get that second chance at life depends a lot on the method they use, which in turn depends on what is readily at hand. Firearms afford few second chances. In sum, methods matter.”

First one statue fell, and now others look set to follow like dominos.

Before Black Lives Matter protesters toppled a bronze effigy of 17th-century slave trader Edward Colston in Bristol on Sunday, few would have predicted that the week would end with campaigners drawing up a list of statues targeted to suffer a similar fate.

Councils across the country are also pledging to review controversial monuments in their areas, with London Mayor Sadiq Khan launching a Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm.

Over in the US, the BLM movement has a new rallying cry: “defund the police.” The growing calls to rethink or even abolish the policing system follows attacks on peaceful protesters by law enforcers across the country - tactics that are thrown into harsh relief when compared with the actions of UK police at similar demonstrations.

To find out how closely you’ve been paying attention to the latest developments in the pandemic, and other global events, put your knowledge to the test with our Quiz of The Week:

Need a reminder of some of the other headlines over the past seven days?

Bestselling children’s author J.K. Rowling is in hot water after tweeting a series of messages labelled “transphobic” by critics. And the row took a further twist when Rowling defended her comments in an essay in which she also reveals herself to be a victim of sexual and domestic assault.

Meanwhile, Brexit talks between Britain and the EU hit the skids over much disputed fishing regulations. The UK government is facing further hostility at home too, after an ex-adviser suggested that locking down a week earlier would have significantly reduced the country’s coronavirus death toll.

In other international dust-ups, the EU accused Russia and China of spreading coronavirus disinformation, while Moscow warned the US against including Beijing in upcoming nuclear disarmament talks.

Despite the various rows, there has been some cause for celebration. Prince Philip marked his 99th birthday while shielding with the Queen in Windsor Castle.

And the rest of the country may soon have reason to raise a toast as well, with pubs set to reopen later this month under a new government plan to “save the summer”.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

J.K. Rowling has responded to widespread criticism of her views on transgender issues by opening up about her life as a survivor of sexual assault and domestic abuse.

In a 3,700-word essay published on her official website, the Harry Potter author reiterates her allegedly “anti-trans” comments and explains that her own experiences influenced her decision to speak out.

Rowling - who until now “has guarded her privacy closely”, notes The Times - has faced a growing row over her tweets about biological sex, with thousands of fellow Twitter users accusing her of transphobia.

Among the bestselling writer’s critics are former stars of the film versions of her books including Emma Watson, who played Hermione Granger, and Eddie Redmayne, who featured in the spin-off movie Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

In a statement to entertainment magazine Variety, Redmayne said: “As someone who has worked with J.K. Rowling and members of the trans community, I wanted to make it absolutely clear where I stand. I disagree with Jo’s comments.”

Meanwhile, Watson tweeted that “trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned or told they aren’t who they say they are”.

But Rowling insists that she has a number of “reasons for being worried about the new trans activism” .

Chief among these, she says in her essay, is that as a survivor of a “serious sexual assault”, she felt compelled to make a case for why maintaining safe “single-sex spaces” for women is important.

Not everyone is convinced by her argument, however. According to the Los Angeles Times, “despite Rowling’s insistence that she wanted a nuanced discussion on the topic… ultimately her concerns seemed to boil down to one about bathrooms”.

Among Rowling’s claims “was that affirming anybody other than cisgender people (those whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth) as ‘women’ would somehow lead to them being unsafe in places like public restrooms and changing rooms”, the newspaper says.

Yet “there is no evidence that transgender people using the restrooms that align with their gender identity puts anybody else in danger”.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

For Amrou Al-Kadhi, a British-Iraqi writer and drag performer, the key problem is Rowling’s seeming belief that transgender people “are an ideological cult on a mission to vanquish the very idea of sex”.

Writing in The Independent, Al-Kadhi says: “Transgender people... in contradiction to Rowling’s apparent claims, have never called for the eradication of sex-based protections and reproductive rights.”

In fact, “trans people are only trying to expand the understanding of sex so that society may better accommodate their needs”, he continues, adding: “Is that really so terrible?”

Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe, who played the eponymous boy wizard, has also outlined his views in a written response to Rowling’s tweeted comments.

“Transgender women are women,” Radcliffe says in a statement published by the The Trevor Project charity, which provides crisis intervention for LGBT young people. “Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.”

The actor finishes with an apology to Harry Potter fans, writing: “To all the people who now feel that their experience of the books has been tarnished or diminished, I am deeply sorry for the pain these comments have caused you.”

J.K. Rowling has been accused of tweeting “anti-trans comments” just six months after triggering controversy by supporting a woman sacked for using “offensive and exclusionary” language on social media.

The latest row began on Saturday, when the Harry Potter author mocked the phrasing of an online article headlined “Creating a more equal post-Covid-19 world for people who menstruate”.

“‘People who menstruate’. I'm sure there used to be a word for those people,” Rowling tweeted along with a link to the op-ed, published on media platform Devex. “Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”

Fellow Twitter users quickly called out the bestselling writer, noting that many people who do not menstruate identify as women, including transgender women, women who have gone through menopause, and those who may not have periods at all.

Critics also pointed out that not everyone who does menstruate identifies as a woman, such as transgender men and non-binary people.

As the backlash intensified, Rowling responded with a series of tweets detailing her views:

Firing back a response to her arguments, LGBTQ rights-focused media monitoring organisation Glaad tweeted: “J.K. Rowling continues to align herself with an ideology which willfully distorts facts about gender identity and people who are trans... In 2020, there is no excuse for targeting trans people.”

Meanwhile, Forbes’ senior art contributor Dani Di Placido warned that “J.K. Rowling is destroying her legacy, one tweet at a time”.

This view was echoed by actor Jameela Jamil, who tweeted: “To JK Rowling: verb: To go out of your way to destroy your iconic legacy.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Rowling wasn’t “left completely twisting the wind though”, says The Telegraph.

Former tennis player Martina Navratilova defended Rowling in a tweet to one of the author’s critics. “I am sorry if you think speaking up for a level playing field for girls and women in sports is hurtful. What is hurtful is saying to girls and women to just try harder,” Navratilova wrote.

Chat show host Jonathan Ross also backed Rowling, writing: “JK Rowling is both right and magnificent. For those accusing her of transphobia, please read what she wrote. She clearly is not.”

But Pride.com disagrees, condemning the writer’s views on trans issues as “repugnant” and accusing her of “doubling down on transphobia”.

“It’s becoming an increasingly familiar sight for trans folk, watching Rowling comment on their lives,” adds Pink News. “Her actions which have stirred reaction have, in the past, been called ‘middle-aged moments’ by her representatives.”

Rowling caused uproar in December by tweeting her support for Maya Forstater, a British researcher who filed a lawsuit claiming that her employer, the Washington D.C.-based Center for Global Development, had discriminated against her because of her beliefs that people cannot change their sex.

“Dress however you please,” Rowling wrote on Twitter at the time. “Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill.”

In response, Alphonso David, president of LGBTQ advocacy group Human Rights Campaign, accused Rowling of being an anti-trans fundamentalist.

“J.K. Rowling says she’s opposed to fundamentalism in any form, but she’s promoting a harmful fundamentalism that endangers the LGBTQ community - particularly transgender youth,” David said in a statement. “She should apologise.”

In the wake of Rowling’s latest controversial post, Forbes contributor Di Placido concludes that her “sudden shift into trans-exclusionary feminism emphasises the importance of staying away from Twitter, for sanity’s sake.

“The opinions of beloved children’s authors are, sometimes, better left to the imagination.”

J.K. Rowling is at the centre of a row about transgender issues after she spoke out in support of a woman who lost an employment tribunal case for using “offensive and exclusionary” language on social media.

The Harry Potter author tweeted to her 14.6 million Twitter followers about Maya Forstater, who lost her job at a leading think tank after a series of tweets, including one in which she said: “Men cannot change into women.”

Rowling wrote: “Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya.”

Rowling’s name quickly trended on Twitter, with some users describing her as a “transphobe”, or a “Terf” - referring to the term, trans-exclusionary radical feminist.

Forstater hit the headlines when she lost her job as a visiting fellow at the Centre for Global Development, an international anti-poverty thinktank that has offices in London and Washington.

An employment tribunal heard that she had retweeted transphobic material, including a cartoon of a person flashing two women at a London swimming pond, with the caption “It’s alright – it’s a woman’s penis”.

Forstater had also tweeted that “it is unfair and unsafe for trans women to compete in women’s sport”.

She was told by a judge her view that transgender people cannot change their sex was “not worthy of respect”.

James Tayler also ruled that Forstater did not have the right to ignore or deny the legal rights of trans people and said her tweets were “incompatible with human dignity and fundamental rights of others”.

Forstater said she was “struggling to express the shock and disbelief I feel at reading this judgment, which I think will be shared by the vast majority of people who are familiar with my case”.

After Rowling spoke out, reaction in the media has been a mixture of condemnation and support.

Describing the tweet as “transphobic BS,” Vox said: “JKR just ruined Harry Potter, Merry Christmas.”

Writing for the Daily Mail, Julie Bindel said “the temperature on trans issues has a habit of reaching boiling point almost immediately, and is one in which very few people are brave enough to dip their toe”.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Start your trial subscription today –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Controversialist-for-hire Piers Morgan has attacked Stormzy for telling schoolchildren that Boris Johnson is a “bad man”.

The British rapper was talking to pupils at his old primary school in Thornton Heath, south London, when he was asked by one child why he didn’t like the prime minister. He replied that Johnson was “a very, very bad man”.

Stormzy, who backed Jeremy Corbyn and Labour in the run-up to the general election, compared the prime minister to the “big, bad wolf”.

Morgan tweeted: “He shouldn’t have done this, and shouldn’t have been allowed to do this.”

In a separate tweet, he told the rapper: “You’re a hugely influential role model now to so many youngsters. Wield that power more carefully.”

Stormzy replied: “They asked me a question and I answered it truthfully and with jest… I gave em my opinion. They’ll grow up and be able to make their own. This ain’t a shocking incident pal sorry lol.”

Morgan is known for his Twitter spats. Here’s the rest of his top five:

Gary Lineker

One of Morgan’s most frequent targets for debate is former England striker, Match of the Day host and Walkers crisps salesman Gary Lineker.

Morgan tweeted in 2015 that Lineker “wasn’t a ‘striker’ – he was a ‘goal-hanger’”. Lineker hit back with “Better to be a goal-hanger than a phone-hacker.”

Ariana Grande

Morgan got into hot water with Ariana Grande and her family after criticising the band Little Mix for “stealing” a photo idea.

Grande’s mother Joan called Morgan out for his criticism of Little Mix, to which he responded that he would prefer the band “use their talent to sell records rather than their nudity”.

The argument ended when Grande’s supporters circulated a sultry ad Morgan had done for fast-food chain Burger King in 2009.

Enough to put you off your Whopper.

JK Rowling

Morgan’s sucking up to Donald Trump didn’t impress the Harry Potter author JK Rowling. She tweeted: “If you’d only read Harry Potter, you’d know that the downside of sucking up to the biggest bully in school is getting burned alive,” she said.

After Morgan said he’d never read “a word” of Harry Potter, Rowling shared a screenshot of an article that waxed lyrical about the magical wizarding world she had created. “Could the writer let me know who he is? I’d love to thank him.”

The writer? Piers Morgan.

Sophie Turner

After the actor Beverley Callard said celebrities were trying to make mental health problems “fashionable”, Morgan took it upon himself to tweet his support, saying it was “100% true”.

But Game of Thrones star Sophie Turner disagreed, saying speaking out helped remove the stigma from mental illness. She summed up by directing a four-letter expletive at Morgan.

A rare first edition of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone has sold at auction in Staffordshire for £28,500.

The hardback children’s book, published by Bloomsbury on 30 June 1997, was bought over the phone by a UK collector, says Sky News.

The book was sold by an office worker who snapped it up for £1 at a table-top sale some 20 years ago. The seller, who did not wish to be named, said: “I can’t believe it. It’s what I’d hoped for but I never really believed my book would make that price.

“I knew another Harry Potter first edition had sold for £28,000 but I was panicking as there had been no bids prior to the sale.”

The book was from the very first print run of 500 copies, most of them destined for schools and libraries, and was identifiable by two printing errors, among other details. It is an edition described as the “Holy Grail” for Harry Potter fans by Potter site Mugglenet.

It sold despite being an ex-library copy – generally something that lowers the value of a first edition – stamped with “withdrawn from stock” in red ink on the inside.

Jim Spencer, from Hansons Auctioneers, said three telephone bidders had battled for the copy, pushing up the price in the process. He added: “When our client bought the book for £1 all those years ago, no one realised what a huge impact the Harry Potter stories would have globally.”

What makes a Harry Potter book valuable?

Mugglenet lists the defining signs for the “Holy Grail” hardback first UK edition of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone:

• The publisher name is given as Bloomsbury at the bottom of the title page
• The date listed in the copyright information is 1997
• The bottom line of the copyright page should read “10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1”
• A list of school supplies on page 53 should include “1 wand” twice

In addition, Sky News says the copy sold this week by Hansons had a misspelling of “Philosopher” on the back cover.

Of course, the Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone UK hardback first edition is not the only valuable Harry Potter book. First editions of all the novels are valuable - as are proof editions and other rarities.

Are there forgeries?

Yes, says Mugglenet, there are – so what is needed, to quote Rowling’s character Mad-Eye Moody, is: “Constant vigilance!”

Unethical dealers wanting to create a fake copy can take the copyright page and page 53, the one with the “1 wand” misprint, from a paperback copy and insert them into a hardback second printing copy.

The forger has to be prepared to spend around £5,000 on the two editions required to make the fake – and then cut them up. But the resulting forgery could be passed off for as much as £28,000.

At the end of the Harry Potter fantasy prequel, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, we find out about the dark wizard Grindelwald as well as his plan to expose the magical community to the wider, non-magical world.

In the next instalment, The Crimes of Grindelwald, the wizard escapes from captivity and begins his campaign to take the wizards out of hiding and into the ascendancy. His actions threaten to disrupt the secrecy about magic that ensures the safety of both the magical and non-magical populations.

Like the evil Lord Voldemort and his Death Eaters in the Harry Potter books and films, Grindelwald and his followers resemble a secular version of a coven with Grindelwald fulfilling the role of the devil. His followers must swear their loyalty and do his bidding. In secret meetings, they plot to overthrow society as we know it.

Perhaps because the wizarding world of JK Rowling is intended for family entertainment, few details are provided about the activities at these meetings – but it is clear that Voldemort and his Death Eaters have no qualms about tormenting muggles (non-wizards) and wizards who aren’t pure-blooded for amusement as well as to further their plans. We don’t know that much about Grindelwald yet except that he was expelled from Durmstrang – a wizarding school known for its tolerance of the “Dark Arts” – for conducting “twisted experiments”.

Dark rituals

Throughout late medieval and early modern Europe, it was increasingly believed that witches met in secret to engage in dark rites and to plot society’s downfall. In the early 14th century, Alice Kyteler, a moneylender in Kilkenny, Ireland, was accused of using witchcraft to first infatuate and then murder her four husbands. She and her accomplices would supposedly meet at night to renounce their Christian faith and make potions in the skull of a decapitated robber, using ingredients such as worms, fingernails and hairs from dead bodies, as well as clothing from unbaptised children. Kyteler’s trial is notable for the way it treats witchcraft as a serious act of heresy rather than a petty secular crime. Kyteler herself managed to escape punishment by fleeing Ireland, but her servant Petronilla was tortured and later executed.

A century later, Johannes Nider described in the Formicarius how witches met in secret in the presence of a demon to reject Christianity. Nider described how witches’ curses caused the death of infants who were then stolen from their graves to be cooked in a cauldron and made into potions. The Formicarius in turn was an important source for the Malleus Maleficarum (the Hammer of Witches), which was written in 1486 by Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger and first published in Germany in 1487 – just in time to take advantage of the invention of the printing press. It was reprinted multiple times.

As time passed, the depictions of these secret meetings – or Sabbaths – became increasingly extreme, with the witches meeting to perform unspeakable rituals and obscene sexual acts. In 1612, Pierre de Lancre, a French magistrate and witch-hunter, describes hearing confessions by accused witches of attending Sabbaths presided over by devils.

After kissing the master’s backside, they would dance naked and then couple with demons and with each other. Artistic depictions of these dark rites also became increasingly extravagant. Witchcraft was seen as a growing threat to Christendom, justifying countless trials and executions.

Ancient prejudice

It is possible to trace these claims back to accusations made against heretics throughout the Middle Ages and even against Christians in ancient Rome. A letter written by Pope Gregory in 1233, Vox in Rama, describes rituals in which initiates into a heretical sect kiss a monstrous toad and then the hindquarters of a large black cat, followed by an orgy with other members.

Before Christianity was widely accepted in the Roman Empire, there were concerns that Christians conducted secret orgies and cannibal feasts – possibly a misunderstanding of the Christian mass, with its consumption of the body and blood of Christ and the kiss of peace. Christians, like the heretics and witches whom they would later persecute, were also once perceived as a threat to society, embodying values that were seen as abhorrent.

In this way, villains such as Grindelwald and Voldemort reflect contemporary concerns about social justice. They seek to produce a society that would be less tolerant and inclusive – and yet their beliefs are actually more extreme versions of prejudices held more widely in the world of wizards. Destroying the villain does not destroy that which we fear because it is so deeply embedded in society and often within ourselves.

There is little evidence to suggest that there is any truth to these centuries-old accusations, rather they serve as dark fantasies of human society’s deepest anxieties. Throughout history we have projected our worst fears onto our perceived enemies, imagining how they plot in secret together to overthrow everything that we hold most dear – whether it is the established social order, religious faith, or values such as mutual respect and tolerance.

Villains such as Grindelwald and Voldemort are so compelling because they embody these fears and anxieties. The concern that secret groups still plot in the shadows (even if they probably don’t conduct orgies or eat human flesh) is ancient and enduring. But we should be cautious about demonising those with whom we don’t agree. When we project our deepest fears onto others, we can lose sight of their humanity – and that’s when the witch-hunts start in earnest.

Marta Cobb, Teaching Fellow in Medieval Studies, University of Leeds

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

J.K. Rowling has hit back at allegations of racism over a controversial casting choice for The Crimes of Grindelwald, the upcoming sequel to to her Harry Potter spin-off Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

Early reports that South Korean actress Claudia Kim would appear in the new film were confirmed this week with the release of the trailer - which shows her in the role of Nagini, a woman who can transform into a snake at will.

The Daily Express points out that “as Harry Potter readers and viewers will know, she will become a snake permanently”, and fall under the control of evil wizard Lord Voldemort. Some fans have “branded the casting racially insensitive, as Nagini is a cursed woman who is submissive to a man”, as well as playing into tropes exoticising Asian women, reports the London Evening Standard.

The Fantastic Beasts series “has previously attracted criticism for its largely white cast”, says The Guardian, but now Rowling is under fire on Twitter for the casting of Kim.

One critic wrote: “Listen Joanne, we get it, you didn’t include enough representation when you wrote the books. But suddenly making Nagini into a Korean woman is garbage.

“Representation as an afterthought for more woke points is not good representation.”

Rowling responded directly to the comment, writing: “The Naga are snake-like mythical creatures of Indonesian mythology, hence the name ‘Nagini’.

“They are sometimes depicted as winged, sometimes as half-human, half-snake. Indonesia comprises a few hundred ethnic groups, including Javanese, Chinese and Betawi.”

She added: “Have a lovely day.”

Writing a novel consistently tops the list of unrealised new year’s resolutions, alongside losing weight and drinking less.

But if, ten months into 2018, you still haven’t put metaphorical pen to paper, don’t worry, there is still time to make a start.

See what’s worked for famous authors in the past, or skip down to read the nine most common follies to avoid when starting off.

Have a routine and stick to it

It doesn’t matter whether you work best first thing in the morning or last thing at night, the key is to work out when you are at your most productive, then keep to that schedule.

For writers including Leo Tolstoy, Jane Austen, Ernest Hemingway and Kurt Vonnegut, this meant getting up early, around dawn, putting in a hard shift before lunch then relaxing, editing or doing other work for the rest of the day... or in the case of Hemingway drinking.

Another legendary drinker, Jack Kerouac, had the opposite approach, not waking until the afternoon then writing from midnight to dawn. Franz Kafka and Catch 22’s Joseph Heller both had full time jobs, as an insurance agent and ad executive respectively, so were also forced to write at night.

For others, such as Steven King, routine means setting yourself a target of a certain number of new pages every day (in his case six) and hitting that mark no matter what. Authors write at different speeds but almost all set themselves a daily word count.

In a 2004 Paris review interview Haruki Murakami, regarded as one of the world’s greatest living novelists, revealed his daily routine:

“When I’m in writing mode for a novel, I get up at 4am and work for five to six hours. In the afternoon, I run for ten kilometres or swim for fifteen hundred meters (or do both), then I read a bit and listen to some music. I go to bed at 9pm I keep to this routine every day without variation. The repetition itself becomes the important thing; it’s a form of mesmerism. I mesmerise myself to reach a deeper state of mind.”

Find the right place to work

Truman Capote, the author of Breakfast at Tiffany’s and In Cold Blood, famously wrote sitting up in bed, his typewriter resting on his knees. Ernest Hemingway often wrote standing up as did Victor Hugo, while Roald Dahl retreated to his shed at the end of the garden. The legendary Hollywood screenwriter Dalton Trumbo often wrote and edited in the bath as it was the only way he could get away from his children.

While these may be extreme examples, studies have shown that each of us has an optimal working position which can be affected by as little a change as shifting the direction of your desk so light enters your eyes from a different angle.

On the other hand, some people, often out of necessity, thrive in a challenging environment. JK Rowling does not have a set-in-stone routine, preferring to write whenever and wherever she can.

“Sometimes you have to get your writing done in spare moments here and there” she said. “I can write anywhere. I made up the names of the characters on a sick bag while I was on an airplane.”

Fiona Mozley, who was shortlisted for this year’s Man Booker Prize, wrote her debut novel on her phone on the train back and forth from London to York.

Disconnect from the internet

A modern phenomenon that will no doubt be familiar to anyone who has ever wasted an hour, or day, lost in the internet.

The writer and essayist Susan Sontag told people not to call in the morning and never answered the phone, however, with the rise of the internet modern authors have had to take more drastic measures to stay focused.

One of the most extreme of these is Pulitzer-prize winning writer Jonathan Franzen, who literally cuts his internet cable when he starts a novel.

Zadie Smith also stresses the importance of getting offline, but her method is to work on a computer not hooked up to the internet. Others use internet blocking software which means their time online is rationed at to give them 15 minutes per every thousand words.

Read, read and read some more

Picasso once said: “Good artists copy, great artists steal”. Every author is indebted in some part to those who have gone before, and whether it is through the classics or pulp, any external influence can only improve and strengthen your own writing.

“Just like a carpenter who works as an apprentice and studies the master” William Faulkner said. “Read! You’ll absorb it. Then write. If it is good, you’ll find out. If it’s not, throw it out the window.”

Stephen King, meanwhile, said: “If you don’t have time to read, you don’t have the time - or the tools - to write. Simple as that.”

“It’s true that to write well you need to read widely and reading diverse books will enrich your own writing” says NowNovel; “but be selective about what references you consciously include because your novel should ultimately be your own story rather than a patchwork of transparent influences.”

Don’t be afraid of bad drafts – they are better than not writing at all

E.B. White, the author of Charlotte’s Web, once said that: “A writer who waits for ideal conditions under which to work will die without putting a word on paper.”

In a 1975 issue of The Paris Review, Steinbeck advises would-be novelists not to focus excessively on the end goal:

“Abandon the idea that you are ever going to finish. Lose track of the 400 pages and write just one page for each day, it helps. Then when it gets finished, you are always surprised.”

For every budding author, the key then is to just begin. Speaking to The Guardian, Miranda July said: “At some point, I didn’t realise I was writing a first draft. And the first draft was the hardest part. From there, it was comparatively easy. It was like I had some Play-Doh to work with and could just keep working with it – doing a million drafts and things changing radically and characters appearing and disappearing and solving mysteries.”

So get writing.

Nine follies to avoid when writing your first novel

by Robert Twigger

1. The folly of the unattractive narrator

The reader has to like your narrator's voice (not the narrator himself but his voice; they are connected but different) otherwise you don't care what happens. A novel is all about caring what happens. True, Jorge Luis Borges, in his collection of short stories, Labyrinths, does manage an unrepentant Nazi concentration camp boss as the narrator of Deutsches Requiem - but that only lasted four pages. Four pages of flagrant fascistic foulness is all a normal person can stand. Be likeable, be fascinating, be evil if you like - but don't be deeply unattractive.

2. The folly of 'plot' first

Leave 'plot' or structure until last. There are millionaires out there like Robert McKee, author of Story, who have made a fortune telling us 'Story' is everything. They then provide a strict format to follow. To be fair, even some esteemed writers advocate this structural approach but it kills more than it cures. The real problem with plot-driven plotting is that the events of the novel are conceived to fit the plot. This tends to make them contrived. Better to find events you are convinced you need and can render plausibly, and then later weld them together with adequate structure.

3. The folly of facts before relationships

Nabokov informed us, convincingly, that a novel is a world. Reading this, a new writer of fiction hares off and starts describing this world in intricate detail, inventing all manner of places and events. But think of your own world - it isn't about detail, it's about relationships.

To create a world you need a certain number of relationships. And the key is: they must cross age groups and boundaries. If everyone is the same age then you have a subculture not a world. One of the devices always used by Philip K. Dick, the science-fiction author of Memoirs of a Crap Artist, and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep (which was to become Blade Runner), was a three-way relationship between a grandfather, a father and a son. In some of his books the grandfather was a guide figure. You can see how this fits with both Star Wars and Harry Potter - with Dumbledore as the archetypal grandfather.

4. The folly of not being heartfelt

A novel deals with that which is heartfelt by the characters. You can't write about the weather and the state of the nation if your main character has a hang up about sex. Sex is his thing, his heartfelt concern, so get that out in the open. Even a clever scene well done will feel thin and containing too much information if it is not heartfelt, if the character doesn't care that much.

5. The folly of not leaving things out

You're writing about a policeman who plays golf, which is his passion. You know about golf but not much about the police. To prove the opposite you keep putting in references that show you've done your homework on the boys in blue. Forget it. Leave it out. Write about the thing you do know - golf - and skip over the rest. One good tip is to make all policemen (if this is your weak spot) hate their work - that way you don't have to write about technical things at all. Remember an author can miss anything he likes out - and should - otherwise it becomes far too boring.

6. The folly of excessive detail

What level of detail to put in is a frequent concern for the novelist. In fact it's the narrative voice which determines the correct level of detail. 'Voice', when you strip it down, is just a reflection of the one or two basic concerns of the narrator - most usually, what is threatening him either physically or mentally. Depending on what is at stake for the narrator, or the character through whose eyes we view things, we see and take note differently. Just as we notice all kinds of trivial details as we wait expectantly in a room for the results of a medical examination, so the level of detail is intimately connected to the 'level of threat' under which the central character/narrator is put.

7. The folly of mistaking linked events for real plot

One damn thing after another, tied up neatly, is usually called 'the plot'. But real plot exists in the first sentence. It is the sense of tension or expectation in that sentence, not story or event sequence or causal sequence or character motive.

It's about the least understood part of writing - but you can easily develop a nose for it. The best way is to think of a character with a conflict in their personality - say a body builder who works in a library restoring old manuscripts. From the very start there is something to write about here.

Plot is simply that: something to write about. That's how you can feel its presence in the first sentence - are you being pulled by this 'something' or are you pushing an idea in your head out onto the page? You need to get used to being pulled along. The situation you put the characters in - the world, if you like - must exert sufficient pressure on them to give you something to write about.

8. The folly of proposals

It's tempting to try to get a deal before you do the hard work but it's the writing equivalent of a 110 per cent mortgage. You'll have to write a cracking proposal as well as the first few chapters and it will take as long as the book to do this. You will have to do the book anyway, you will have to solve the problems some time - so why not now?

9. The folly of not having an agent

In Naples a lowly thug stands with his hand over a post box - you pay him to remove his hand so you can post your letter. Many writers feel the same way about agents. Don't. Getting your novel accepted is a process of serially convincing people. The first person is an agent. They don't have to be famous. In fact a young gun going all out beats an old lag who thinks life's a drag anytime. But you need to have convinced one person after your mother that your work deserves a readership of millions. Best of luck!

Robert Twigger has published six novels

After much speculation, British author J.K. Rowling has released a statement confirming that US actor Johnny Depp will portray the character of Gellert Grindelwald in next year’s sequel to the Harry Potter spin-off film Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

There had been “question marks over the casting after allegations of domestic abuse were filed against Depp”, the Daily Telegraph says.

Depp had already made a cameo as Grindelwald in the first Fantastic Beasts film, but questions over his continued role in the franchise were asked after he was accused of verbal and physical abuse by his wife Amber Heard, who has since filed for divorce and a restraining order.

The two later reached a settlement and released a joint statement, which stated “there was never any intent of physical or emotional harm” in their relationship.

In a statement on her website, Rowling defended the casting.

“When Johnny Depp was cast as Grindelwald, I thought he’d be wonderful in the role. However, around the time of filming his cameo in the first movie, stories had appeared in the press that deeply concerned me and everyone most closely involved in the franchise,” Rowling wrote.

“Harry Potter fans had legitimate questions and concerns about our choice to continue with Johnny Depp in the role. As David Yates, long-time Potter director, has already said, we naturally considered the possibility of recasting. I understand why some have been confused and angry about why that didn’t happen.

“Based on our understanding of the circumstances, the filmmakers and I are not only comfortable sticking with our original casting, but genuinely happy to have Johnny playing a major character in the movies.”

After the statement was released, many fans of the series took to Twitter to criticise the decision.

JK Rowling's Cormoran Strike detective novels have been adapted for a new BBC One television series starring Tom Burke as a war veteran turned private detective.

Burke's character, Cormoran Strike, has suffered both physical and psychological wounds, but has also gained unique insight from his background as a SIB military investigator, which helps him tackle cases that elude the police.

Morgan Jeffrey on Digital Spy says that Burke, who appeared in the TV adaptation of War and Peace as the wolfish Dolokhov, was an ideal choice for Strike, despite being physically different to the character described in the novels. The book version of Cormoran Strike is a tall "hulking man".

Michael Keillor, director of the first three-part Strike series, insists that Burke is so "charismatic" that his lack of height and bulk won't concern book fans for long. Burke's character will also be missing part of his leg, after being caught up in a bombing in Afghanistan, just as in the novels.

Alongside Burke, Holliday Grainger (Great Expectations) will play Robin, Strike's assistant, who must manage his chaotic life and soon becomes involved in his cases. In The Cuckoo's Calling, they reopen an investigation into the suspicious death of a supermodel.

Sarah Phelps, who adapted another JK Rowling adult novel, The Casual Vacancy, and Ben Richards (Spooks, Outcasts, The Tunnel) were signed up to adapt Rowling's novels for television.

Jake Kerridge in the Daily Telegraph says Strike is JK Rowling's "crowning achievement" with "much to enjoy" in the opening instalment of the series.

The critic praises the chemistry of the lead characters, saying the series is designed "not so much to get the viewers’ adrenaline pumping as to make them laugh, think and occasionally shiver".

The novels were originally published under the name of Robert Galbraith. Several months after the first book, The Cuckoo’s Calling, was released in 2013, the author's real identity was revealed.

Rowling had wanted her authorship kept a secret, The Independent says but one of her lawyers gossiped to a friend and the truth was soon revealed on Twitter. As soon as Rowling was outed as the author, the book by the “debut novelist” shot from 4,709th position in the Amazon sales chart to number one.

It was followed in 2014 by The Silkworm and Career Of Evil in 2015. All three books went on to become number one Sunday Times bestsellers lists and Little, Brown sold over four million copies of the worldwide.

The first three-part series, based on The Cuckoo's Calling, will be broadcast on BBC One on 27 August, followed by the Silkworm, set to air in two parts on September 10 and 17. The third instalment, The Career of Evil is to air in 2018.

Situated at the prestigious address of No 1 Prince's Street, The Balmoral Hotel is one of the Scottish capital's most iconic and imposing buildings. Kilted men welcome you at the door and as you enter you're immediately enveloped by the sweet scent of the breathtaking flower arrangements that dominate the lobby.

Over the past few years, the landmark hotel has undergone a stunning multi-million pound refurbishment and the jewel in their renovation crown is the purple-doored JK Rowling suite. The stylish rooms facing the castle have also been renovated to portray a Scottish woodland theme, but it's the Harry Potter author-themed luxury room that's the true star of the show.

JK Rowling's Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was first published twenty ago. The seemingly modest yarn, whose protagonist is a schoolboy magician, went on to spawn a hugely lucrative series of follow-up novels, as well as films, stage shows and theme parks. Now it has spawned tailored luxury stays at one of Edinburgh's best hotels.

The Balmoral's link to the billionaire Hogwarts creator is an intriguing one – the hotel is where Rowling finished the last book in the series. In search of peace and quiet while writing Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, Rowling checked in to the hotel.

Recognising the near-fanatical devotion of legions of Potterheads both at home and abroad, the suite is designed as a sort of shrine to the Scottish author. Bookcases are crammed with Rowling's books, alongside the works of some of her favourite authors. The suite is decorated with owls and is the perfect place for a game of 'spot and attribute the Patronus' (if you don't know what this means, the suite may not be for you).

The hotel has also embraced its Potterlinks in the bar downstairs where it serves magical cocktails that include a Bloody Mary Jelly with Celery Air and Smoked Butter Beer (which I can confirm is delicious). Guests in the suite can also tour the streets of Edinburgh on a PotterTrail, which is a must for any serious Hogwarts fan. You'll discover how Rowling was influenced by Edinburgh's history and can visit some of the cafes where she did most of her writing.

If you're not a Harry Potter fan don't despair; there are plenty of things you will love at The Balmoral. In the whisky bar 'Scotch' you're surrounded by wall-to-wall bottles of Scotland's greatest export. Bartenders who describe themselves as 'walking menus' offer advice on what you might like to try. The dinner menu is also excellent – the hotel says that people travel for miles to buy sides of the Balmoral's very own smoked salmon and it's easy to see why. I was more excited by the smoked salmon trolley than I have ever been by a trolley laden with desserts.

Whether it's your first or 51st time visiting Edinburgh, the views, quality of service and food and drink at The Balmoral will delight muggles, witches and wizards alike.

The Magical Experience suite package at Edinburgh's Balmoral Hotel is available from £2,500. The newly-renovated super deluxe rooms that face the castle start at £450 per night for room only

Two new Harry Potter books are set to be released in October to coincide with a new exhibition about JK Rowling's fantasy series.

Publisher Bloomsbury announced the publication of the books to tie in with the upcoming British Library exhibition Harry Potter: A History of Magic, which runs from 20 October to the end of February 2018.

The books explore the magical world of Harry Potter, but are not new novels or stories about the original characters.

Harry Potter: A History of Magic, the book of the exhibition, will outline the curriculum at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, including herbology, astronomy and care of magical creatures, while Harry Potter: A Journey Through the History of Magic will present a more historical account of Harry Potter's world, delving into the stories behind spells, magical creatures, and wizards and witches.

The exhibition will include previously unseen sketches and pages from Rowling's manuscripts, illustrations from Jim Kay and artefacts from the library archives.

Together with the books, it represents the ever-growing realm of Potterdom experiences, feeding a seemingly unquenchable demand for the fictional world Rowling created more than 20 years ago.

Earlier this week, the Financial Times reported on how publishing group Bloomsbury is reaping the revival of the Harry Potter franchise.

Quarterly revenues were up 19 per cent in the three months to March year-on-year. The Harry Potter series still ranks among the publisher’s bestsellers, alongside Neil Gaiman's Norse Mythology, despite the last novel being published in 2007.

It continues to flourish thanks to a series of spin-off books such as Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, films based on those books and the Harry Potter and the Cursed Child play currently in London's West End.

Writers have long predicted the demise of the Potter phenomenon. Tanya Gold, in The Guardian in 2011, dubbed the release of the last film in the main series the "beginning of an end".

Nevertheless, Pottermania remains a global phenomenon, as Rosa Silverman in the Daily Telegraph reports. The boy wizard has cast his spell over swathes of the world's readers, young and old, working "the kind of magic most publishers could only dream of".

If, as Silverman argues, the boy wizard has inspired "a devotion among fans last seen around the time of Jesus Christ", it may be some time before Potterdom wanes.

TV presenter and former England striker Gary Lineker has spoken out on Twitter about feeling "politically homeless" as politicians scatter to the left and right.

"Everything seems far right or way left," the footballer said. "Something sensibly centrist might appeal?"

Others lent their agreement, including Dragons Den star Deborah Meaden and cricket reporter Elizabeth Ammon.

Might there be space for a new centrist party not led by Tim Farron? And who might take it to glory?

Gary Lineker

Why not the man himself? Lineker has long been outspoken on Twitter, with thousands of re-tweets and likes whenever he takes to his keyboard. From Europe to social media to opinion polls, Lineker is always readily available for public comment, though his views will be sure to alienate some.

Both anti-Brexit and anti-Farage, Lineker sits firmly in the "liberal elite" camp, which may cause problems to those with more populist leanings. Others may baulk at his relative warmth towards the Labour leader.

However, he insists that he's most comfortable in the strong and stable centre.

JK Rowling

"What should you do if you support Labour but can't stand Jeremy Corbyn?" JK Rowling asked in April. Perhaps she too is hoping to conjure up a new party in the centre of the political spectrum.

The author has sold more than 500 million books and has more than 11 million followers on Twitter. Theresa May has just 366,000.

A staunch critic of the Cameron government, Rowling donated £1m to the Labour Party in 2008, but she's no fan of the party's current direction.

Harry Styles

Though he would be the youngest PM in UK history (narrowly beating William Pitt the Younger, who took office aged 24 in 1783), One Direction frontman Harry Styles could be an electoral dark horse.

"I'm not educated enough on the subject to really go toe-to-toe with someone about it," he said in May when questioned on Brexit, but last year's US election has proved that a lack of experience need not by a barrier. In the words of Michael Gove, "people have had enough of experts", so perhaps the 23-year old is more suited to political office than he realises.

A Liberal Democrat voter, Styles is in pole position to take the centre by storm - and he's already been dubbed a "remoaner" by the pro-Brexit press. He'll fit right in.

John Cleese

Monty Python star John Cleese has long been a centrist, and a firm Remainer in the Brexit debate. Sharply witty and intimidatingly tall, Cleese would be a fine presence at the PMQs dispatch box, and he has a quiver of insults ready to go. "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries" might be considered unparliamentary by some.

At 77, however, Cleese would be one of the oldest party leaders in British history, and his political judgement may need some fine-tuning. "People are asking me how I shall vote," he tweeted before the election. "I shan't. I live in Chelsea and Kensington, so under our present system my vote is utterly worthless."

The constituency of Kensington ended up being won by Labour from the Conservatives by a margin of 20 votes.

As Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone turns 20, many fans will be inspired to return to the series and catch up with Harry and friends all over again.

Re-reading the books as an adult, however, you might find certains aspects of the story don't quite stand up to scrutiny.

In fact, you'll need more than a magic wand to explain away these six glaring plot holes. Careful, you may never look at Hogwarts the same way...

1. How did no-one notice Peter Pettigrew on the Marauder's Map?

This particular plot hole has had fans of the series scratching their heads for years. In book three, it is revealed that Voldemort's lackey, Peter Pettigrew, has been hidden in plain sight for years, disguised as Ron's pet rat Scabbers. But what about the Marauder's Map, which reveals the location of everyone at Hogwarts? Fred and George Weasley apparently used it for years without ever questioning why a man named Peter Pettigrew was sharing their brother's bed.

2. What's the deal with time-travel?

A subplot in the Prisoner of Azkaban which later becomes a vital part of the story sees Hermione being allowed to use a time-turner in order to take extra classes - and opens up a huge philosophical can of worms in the process. For instance, why didn't someone go back in time and kill Voldemort before he became so powerful? Why couldn't Harry go back in time and prevent his parent's death?

JK Rowling has previously admitted that she "went far too light-heartedly into the subject of time travel" and soon realised her predicament: "If wizards could go back and undo problems, where were my future plots?" To resolve the issue, in Order of the Phoenix, Rowling made sure that all time-turners were destroyed in the climactic battle in the Department of Mysteries.

3. How does the wizard economy work?

Gringotts bank is one of the institutions of the wizarding world, but in a society with magic the value of coins, wages and even the concept of money is questionable. Some economically-minded readers have even tried to puzzle out whether wizards have a stock exchange and whether their currency relies on a fixed exchange rate.

The apparently glaring wealth inequality in the magical world has also raised eyebrows. Many fans have questioned why the Weasleys are so down at heel when simple spells can be used to mend their possessions, carry out DIY and perform household chores.

4. Why doesn't Harry see the thestrals after Cedric Diggory dies?

In the wizarding world, thestrals are invisible winged animals which can only be seen by those who have witnessed death. Yet, after watching Cedric Diggory die at the end of Goblet of Fire, Harry is still taken away in what he sees as a "horseless carriage".

Put on the spot by an interviewer in 2004, Rowling said "you can see [the thestrals] only when you really understand death in a broader sense", and that she chose to wait until the reality of Cedric's death had sunk in for her hero to gain the new ability, which he demonstrates in the next book.

5. How hard is it to get Harry to touch something?

At the end of Goblet of Fire, it is revealed that the villainous Barty Crouch Jr - disguised as gruff Auror Mad-Eye Moody - entered Harry's name into the Triwizard Tournament so that he would touch the trophy, which had been transformed into a portkey to teleport Harry to a waiting Voldemort. But why?

Given that Harry had no time to prepare and almost died several times during the contest, there was no guarantee that he would actually win the tournament. And why couldn't Crouch have transformed literally anything else into the portkey? Why set up such an incredibly convoluted scheme when the portkey could just as easily have been Harry's toothbrush?

6. Why does Voldemort always attack at the end of the school year?

Screenrant questions why the Dark Lord's plans always seem to come to fruition just at the end of the summer term. Surely after Voldemort's identically timed appearancs at Hogwarts at the end of books 1,2,3,4 and 5, the school should really have been more prepared for his next attack. However, the site concedes that "a more straightforward evil plot that happened mid-way through the summer holidays just wouldn't be the same".

For the full range of Harry Potter collectables visit the Wizarding World Store on Amazon

As the first Harry Potter novel, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, turns 20, we look at the screen adaptations of JK Rowling's beloved wizarding saga.

Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

Mexican auteur Alfonso Cuaron took over from family-friendly stalwart Chris Columbus for the third film in the series, bringing with him a very different vision of Hogwarts.

Gone was the cosy candlelight and colourful house banners of the previous two films, replaced by crooked Gothic spires, shadowy corners and a washed-out palette. The change in tone was a risk, but it chimed perfectly with the story's darker sensibility, and the resulting film is widely regarded as the best of the bunch by critics.

By firmly imprinting his own slant on the source material, Cuaron "brought to the Potter franchise a quality curiously missing from the two previous films," wrote The Atlantic's Christopher Orr: "Magic."

Buy The Prisoner of Azkaban on Amazon

Deathly Hallows: Part Two (2011)

The "best possible end for the series", as the Wall Street Journal's Joe Morgenstern put it, the final film in the franchise is certainly the fan favourite - viewers gave it an average of 8.1/10 on IMDb, the highest score of all eight movies.

It's not just sentimental value that propels Deathly Hallows: Part Two to the top of the list. The film is a rip-snorting, awe-inspiring and frequently heartbreaking send off to the wizarding world, culminating in a truly epic battle at Hogwarts.

Even among all the spectacular spell battles and collapsing masonry, the quieter moments are never lost - the deaths of beloved characters like Severus Snape and Fred Weasley ought to tickle even the toughest of tear ducts.

Buy The Dealthly Hallows: Part Two on Amazon

Goblet of Fire (2005)

The fourth book in the series, released in 2000, boasts one of the saga's most memorable plots, as Harry unravels the mystery of how he was involuntarily entered into a daredevil wizarding tournament, while simultaneously trying to stay alive.

The film captures the twists and turns with a style "so assured that its 144-minute running time feels half that," said Newsweek's David Ansen.

While some subplots are cut for time, the book's most vivid passages, such as the Yule Ball, the lake rescue and the graveyard showdown with Voldemort, are handsomely transposed to the screen under Mike Newell's sensitive direction.

With a Brit at the helm for the first time, the fourth film "seems more in touch with the innate Britishness of Rowling's books, both in its sense of humor and in its boarding-school setting," sais the AP's Christy Lemire.

Buy The Goblet of Fire on Amazon

Half-Blood Prince (2009)

Director David Yates, who took over the franchise in 2007's Order of the Phoenix, is in full swing in this lively adaptation of the penultimate Potter novel.

The film "navigates potentially choppy shifts in scale with grace and ease", wrote Salon's Stephanie Zacharek, moving seamlessly from the rom-com shenanigans of its adolescent protagonists to the horror-infused final sequences.

Half-Blood Prince is admittedly "more about atmosphere than story", said the AV Club's Tasha Robinson, but masterful cinematography and a moody vibe "give a surprising weight to adolescent love affairs and an exceedingly minor mystery".

Buy The Half-Blood Prince on Amazon

Deathly Hallows: Part One (2010)

Given the hefty page count of JK Rowling's final tome, it is understandable that the studio decided to split it into two films, but the decision inevitably condemned Part One to subordinate status.

David Yates' directorial vision remains strong, the special effects are superb and the actors all game, but it's difficult to escape the feeling that Part One is essentially two hours of set-up for Part Two.

The end product is "beautifully shot" but "soulless", said the New York Post's Lou Lumenick. It delivers "no dramatic payoff, no resolution and not much fun".

Buy The Deathly Hallows: Part One on Amazon

Order of the Phoenix (2007)

The fifth film in the saga features sterling performances from the adult cast, who benefit from the film's focus on the titular order. Imelda Staunton's loathsome Dolores Umbridge is particularly memorable.

However, wrote the New York Post's Kyle Smith, "the parade of subsidiary characters can’t do anything to disguise the stasis of a drawn-out story that is just killing time until the final battle".

The good news is that the action - when it arrives - is dramatic and stylish, largely thanks to new-boy director David Yates, who would go on to helm the remaining three films.

Yates' take on the source material "feels like the product of a vivid cinematic imagination and not just a slavishly faithful transposition", wrote LA Weekly's Scott Foundas.

Buy The Order of The Phoenix on Amazon

Chamber of Secrets (2002)

Chris Columbus' workmanlike adaptation of the second novel in the series, generally regarded as one of Rowling's weaker entries, met with a lukewarm reception from the critics. Columbus faithfully plods through the pages, said Rolling Stone's Peter Travers, "a hat-in-hand approach to Rowling that stifles creativity and allows the film to drag on for nearly three hours".

The film is notable, however, for a marked improvement in the child actors' performances. Radcliffe, Watson and Grint "radiate a newfound confidence", said Newsweek's David Ansen, setting them in good stead for the more challenging material ahead.

Buy The Chamber of Secrets on Amazon

Philosopher's Stone (2001)

The first film in the franchise, released in 2001 to much fanfare, got decent notices at the time, but looking back the flaws are clear.

The three young principals are stiff as a board, the special effects are underwhelming and much of the run-time is taken up with exposition, with a hastily crammed-in mystery at the end.

That said, there is an undeniable thrill in seeing the characters and locations so dear to readers' hearts coming to life for the first time. The adult actors are perfectly cast: Alan Rickman's Snape and Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid, in particular, seem as if they were lifted directly from the pages of Rowling's books.

If director Chris Columbus is guilty of glacial pacing and an uninspired vision, he did impart a vital legacy to the franchise, says Movie Nation's Roger Moore. "He set a production values bar, and a casting one, that the series would uphold to its very end."

Buy the Philosopher's Stone on Amazon

For the full range of Harry Potter collectables visit the Wizarding World Store on Amazon

JK Rowling has come to the rescue of fellow author Stephen King after Donald Trump reportedly blocked the Carrie author from his Twitter feed.

On Tuesday, King, 69, tweeted he could no longer follow the US President on the social network site.

Trump apparently took action after a tweet about his daughter, Ivanka:

However, no sooner had news of the blocking gone out, than Harry Potter novelist Rowling stepped in and offered to keep King informed of the President's tweets.

King has long been an active critic of Trump. Last September, during a Facebook Live interview with Ron Charles, editor of the Washington Post’s Book World, the author said a Trump presidency "scares me more than anything else".

He added: "I'm terrified that he’ll become president."

Once his fears were realised, King began critiquing and mocking Trump on Twitter.

After the President accused his predecessor Barack Obama of wiretapping him, the author wrote:

King isn't the only critic Trump has blocked. According to Heavy, he has stopped the likes of progressive military veterans advocacy group @VoteVets and Forbes journalist Rob Szcerba, who took part in the #cofveve memes, from viewing his posts.

Indeed, the President's habit of blacklisting critics is so common that blockees proudly share the hashtag #blockedbytrump.

However, questions have been raised over whether his actions are constitutional or not.

USA Today reports that non-profit group Knight First Amendment Institute has called on Trump to unblock users or face legal action.

It argues that the President's Twitter account "operates as a 'designated public forum' for First Amendment purposes" and accordingly it is unconstitutional to block users for their views.

Harry Potter author JK Rowling and Good Morning Britain presenter Piers Morgan have been involved in a long exchange of Twitter insults. But what's caused the spat and more importantly, who's winning?

Online hostilities between the two broke out after Rowling tweeted about Morgan's appearance on HBO chat show Real Time with Bill Maher, during which co-host Jim Jefferies told him to "f*** off" while discussing Donald Trump's travel ban.

"Yes, watching Piers Morgan being told to f*** off on live TV is *exactly* as satisfying as I'd always imagined," she wrote.

Morgan retaliated with: "This is why I've never read a single word of Harry Potter."

Undeterred, the author tweeted back: "Because you had a premonition that one day the author would roar with laughter at seeing you called out for your bullshit on live TV?"

Morgan went on to argue that everything he had said on the Bill Maher show was "factual", prompting Rowling to tweet: "Would you like a couple of hours to mock up some pictures of refugees carrying explosives to substantiate your position?", a reference to the journalist being sacked as editor of the Daily Mirror in 2004, after printing fake photos alleging to show British troops torturing an Iraqi detainee.

Things continued to go downhill, with Morgan saying the author was "the worst celebrity political pundit" on the planet and Rowling accusing him of "fact-free, amoral, bigotry apologism".

In another salvo, Rowling suggested that if Morgan had read Harry Potter, he would know that the "downside of sucking up to the biggest bully in school is getting burned alive".

Morgan also used his Daily Mail column to continue the fight, saying Rowling's "sense of political and cultural self-importance is staggeringly overblown for a woman who writes about Hogwarts and Muggles".

The exchange has kept the nation gripped - and entertained - with even renowned political correspondent Robert Peston tweeting: "Best Twitter brawl ever? I mean ever."

Such is the interest in the slanging match that YouGov even commissioned a poll asking the nation who they preferred: JK Rowling or Piers Morgan? The answer was a resounding 55 per cent for Rowling, with only nine per cent of respondents siding with her opponent.

Morgan's own son, Spencer, even seemed to show his solidarity with Rowling - he tweeted a selfie revealing his Harry Potter-themed tattoo and matching necklace, along with the comment: "This is awkward."

As things stand, it appears Rowling has the upper hand after tweeting a flattering description of from an apparently anonymous admirer, who praised her "intensely" private attitude and ability to get children reading.

"Priceless #humblebrag BS," Morgan retorted. "Nobody plays the celebrity game more abusively or ruthlessly than you, Ms 'Intensely Private Billionaire'."

The praise, it turned out, had been written a couple of years earlier by Morgan himself.

As Donald Trump was elected 45th president of the United States in one of the most extraordinary elections in the country's history, some reacted with delight, others with shock, another group with despair - and some just had to joke it out.

There was nowhere better than Twitter to keep track of the mixed emotions. Here are some best tweets so far.

The official account for Charlie Brooker's dystopian drama series Black Mirror noted that truth was stranger than fiction:

Meanwhile, the UK, still recovering from Brexit shock, offered a helping hand:

Royal Jordanian airways saw the lighter side, as well as a business opportunity:

Meanwhile, others joked about the absurdity of voter choices:

Singer Lily Allen and Captain America star Chris Evans were shocked:

Harry Potter author JK Rowling offered a message of resilience in the face of disappointment:

There were celebrations from David Duke, the former imperial wizard of the Ku Klux Klan:

As well as UK journalist Piers Morgan:

For many Americans, however, the next step was clear - time to head for the exit:

If you read Harry Potter and dreamed of hurling the quaffle through the hoop, fending off fiendish bludgers or grabbing a golden snitch, that dream can become a reality thanks to muggle quidditch.

Initially cooked up by students at Middlebury College, Vermont, in 2005, the fictional game is now played across the world, mostly on university campuses.

As Potter fans will remember, Quidditch is played by two seven-a-side teams mounted on broomsticks trying to throw a ball – known as the quaffle – through one of three hoops at each end of the pitch. Each team has a seeker who looks out for the golden snitch, a tiny flying ball worth a usually game-winning 150 points.

At this point, you're probably thinking there is something fundamentally missing from a real-life version of Quidditch: magic.

In muggle quidditch, players still ride broomsticks, although in the absence of enchantments they simply straddle them while running. The quaffle is a slightly deflated volleyball and the bludgers are dodgeballs.

As for the golden snitch, the game's creators came up with a novel solution: a designated person runs around the pitch with a sock containing a tennis ball hanging from their shorts. The seekers then attempt to grab this.

It might sound like a somewhat comical alternative to the high-flying magical action described in JK Rowling's bestselling books, but muggle quidditch has grown steadily in popularity.

USQuidditch estimates there are now more than 300 teams worldwide, in countries including Belgium, Uganda and Vietnam.

For the national teams, the ultimate goal is making it to the annual Quidditch World Cup, organised by the sport's own version of Fifa, the International Quidditch Association. Twenty-three countries will compete in this year's tournament, which will be hosted by Frankfurt, Germany, on 23 and 24 July.

In the UK, regional teams can also try their luck in the British Quidditch Cup, organised by governing body QuidditchUK. Sixteen teams from England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland competed in the 2016 tournament, which was won by the University of Oxford's Radcliffe Chimeras.

Book-to-film adaptations were all the rage in this year's Hollywood awards season, with four making it into the Oscars' shortlist for best picture. Here are the seven of the hottest books-turned-movies to watch out for this year:

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

In case you missed JK Rowling's announcement, the film adaptation of a Harry Potter backstory is due out later this year. Starring Eddie Redmayne, the film will revolve around the adventures of Newt Scamander, the author of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (a wizarding textbook, for all you Muggles Out there).

Set mostly in the United States, part of Newt's adventures will revolve around a Hogwarts-like wizardry school but with a script from Rowling herself, fans are not too worried about the plot. Former Harry Potter director David Yates will be at the helm and – did we mention it's going to be a trilogy?

Out 18 November

The Circle

Based on the book by Dave Eggers, The Circle stars Tom Hanks, Emma Watson and John Boyega in a dystopian thriller where people are obsessed with what they do online.

Watson plays Mae Holland, a woman employed at giant tech company The Circle, which is run by "Three Wise Men" (think Google meets Ministry of Truth). Her life unravels as she climbs the company's ladder. Meanwhile, the mystery man in her life (Boyega) has something to hide. This is Orwell for the 21st century, so get ready to be spooked.

Out this autumn

The Girl on the Train

Last year's debut thriller by Paula Hawkins was an instant bestseller and was promptly snapped up by Hollywood. The London-based story has been moved across the pond to New York and stars Emily Blunt as Rachel, a divorced and depressed alcoholic.

When a woman she sees on her daily train commute ends up dead, Rachel thinks she might have a clue or two about who did it. The book's plot twists and turns and the film should be no different. If only they'd kept King's Cross in.

Out 7 October

Tulip Fever

A love story straight out of a Vermeer painting, Tulip Fever comes from the pen of Deborah Moggach, of the Best Exotic Marigold Hotel adventures.

Set in 17th-century Amsterdam, in the middle of a tulip mania gripping Dutch traders, a married woman sits for a portrait and becomes enthralled with the painter. A plan to elope is hatched, but everything goes horribly wrong. Starring Alicia Vikander and Christoph Waltz, this is a doomed love affair and possibly a great film. Another Oscar for Alicia?

Out autumn 2016

The BFG

The Roald Dahl classic gets a live-action remake, directed by Steven Spielberg and starring Mark Rylance, Rebecca Hall and Ruby Barnhill. The Big Friendly Giant meets a little orphaned girl one night and takes her back to Giant Country.

Children are usually a giant's favourite food, but the BFG has been ostracised by the other giants for refusing to eat them. Instead, he fills his time with blowing dreams through children's windows. Enchantment guaranteed, with possible nominations in the future for sound and special effects.

Out 22 July

Me Before You

Starring Emilia Clarke - sans Game of Thrones' dragons - and Sam Claflin of the Hunger Games trilogy, this is a girl-meets-boy romance based on the book by Jojo Moyes. Louisa is a young woman in need of a job and a life mission who finds both in Will, who has been left permanently disabled after an accident.

She becomes his carer and he becomes her love interest, although his thoughts revolve more around whether he can live his entire life as a disabled man. Think Nicholas Sparks - and equally as tragic.

Out 3 June

One for 2017: On Chesil Beach

Seeing as Saoirse Ronan can do no wrong, get your Oscar predictions ready for this one. This is the second Ian McEwan novel turned film for the actress after Atonement, which won her an Oscar nomination.

Set in 1960s' England, On Chesil Beach is the story of a just-married couple on honeymoon in Dorset, who in the course of a day have to decide whether their union can actually withstand their wildly different natures.

Out in January 2017

This summer is set to be a busy one for Harry Potter fans, with two very big events lined up.

First, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, a play written by JK Rowling, Jack Thorne and John Tiffany, makes its West End debut on 30 July. Then the next day, its script will be published in book form by Little, Brown Book Group. (Oh, and 31 July is also the boy wizard's birthday, as any follower will know.)

As news of the new book makes headlines around the world, here's what we know so far:

Why is the book being published?

Rowling and her team received a "huge number of appeals from fans who can't be in London to see the play and who would like to read the play in book format," said David Shelley, the chief executive of Little, Brown. "We are absolutely delighted to be able to make it available for them."

What's it about?

The plot centres on Harry's struggles as a grown-up wizard, although Rowling has repeatedly said it is a stand-alone story and not a sequel.

According to the synopsis, the play is set 19 years after the original series ended, when Harry is an "overworked" Ministry of Magic employee, a husband and a father of three.

"Harry struggles to keep his past buried and move on, while his youngest son Albus must bear the weight of a family legacy that he does not want," it says. "As the past fuses with the present, father and son face an ominous truth: sometimes, darkness originates where you least expect it."

What's the reaction been so far?

Less than 24 hours after the announcement, the script had already topped the charts on both Amazon's and Waterstone's book lists.

Waterstone's chief executive James Daunt said there are "no sweeter three words to the ears of a bookseller than 'the eighth story'".

He added: "Younger booksellers now face, of course, the dubious prospect of their older colleagues rolling out war stories of Harry Potter launches for the next five months. On 31 July, we will put these into the shade."

Little, Brown have cautioned that the script is a "special rehearsal edition" of the text used during preview performances of the show ahead of its official opening. That means that after the preview period ends, fans can expect another finalised collector's edition to be released.

All this hype around the announcement should come as no surprise, however, as Harry Potter and the Cursed Child was widely anticipated by fans: when tickets for the play were released, the show sold out in just eight hours, with more than 175,000 tickets bought.

Is it really an eighth book?

Fans have been rejoicing over what they see as another book in the Harry Potter series. Rowling, however, was quick to dismiss that notion:

The audience response for the first preview of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child has been "ecstatic", but fans have been warned not to spoil it for others.

The two-part sequel, written by Jack Thorne and based on a story by author JK Rowling, starts 19 years after the final book in the franchise, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. It features a grown-up Harry now married to Ginny (nee Weasley), but also harks back to the wizard's early years as an orphan.

The first of two months of sold-out previews began at London's Palace Theatre last night and will continue until the official opening on 30 July.

In a video message released before the show, Rowling implored fans not to give away the fun: "Let audiences enjoy Cursed Child with all the surprises that we've built into the story."

They were also given badges asking them to "keep the secrets" as they left the theatre.

But the audience was not able to suppress their delight, reports the BBC. The play received an "ecstatic" reception, with hundreds of "spellbound" fans standing and cheering as the first part of the drama came to a close.

Although no official media reviews will be released until after the July premiere, commentators noted the enthusiastic responses.

"The audience came wanting magic and they got in spades," says the Daily Telegraph's Hannah Furness.

The simple staging was "trickery of the highest sophistication", she adds: "Objects seemed to disappear before our eyes and characters appeared as if from nowhere."

Fans tweeted that the show was "brilliant" and "spine-chilling", with one saying their only complaint was that they couldn't read it over and over again, as they do with the novels.

Has Rowling done it again, asks Furness. "The audience was in no doubt."

It was a "magical evening", agrees Claire Fitzsimons in the Daily Mirror. "Spells and hexes combined with laughs and drama mean Harry Potter and the Cursed Child will be every bit the hit everyone expects."

It might be the eighth instalment of the epic story, "but clearly audiences are far from tired of their favourite wizard", she adds. "Judging by the whooping and cheering, nobody was disappointed."

Sarah Lyall in the New York Times says it was jarring for some to see "the reanimation of characters we thought had been put to rest", but this "exciting" play thrusts audiences straight back into the story and raises "tantalising" questions.

Rowling has done an excellent job of shrouding the production in suspense, she adds.

Only the first part, which finished on "a truly shocking note of suspense", has previewed so far. Fans won't learn what happens until the first preview of the second part, on Thursday night.

Harry Potter: new book release sparks frenzy

12 February

This summer is set to be a busy one for Harry Potter fans, with two very big events lined up.

First, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, a play written by JK Rowling, Jack Thorne and John Tiffany, makes its West End debut on 30 July. Then the next day, its script will be published in book form by Little, Brown Book Group. (Oh, and 31 July is also the boy wizard's birthday, as any follower will know.)

As news of the new book makes headlines around the world, here's what we know so far:

Why is the book being published?

Rowling and her team received a "huge number of appeals from fans who can't be in London to see the play and who would like to read the play in book format," said David Shelley, the chief executive of Little, Brown. "We are absolutely delighted to be able to make it available for them."

What's it about?

The plot centres on Harry's struggles as a grown-up wizard, although Rowling has repeatedly said it is a stand-alone story and not a sequel.

According to the synopsis, the play is set 19 years after the original series ended, when Harry is an "overworked" Ministry of Magic employee, a husband and a father of three.

"Harry struggles to keep his past buried and move on, while his youngest son Albus must bear the weight of a family legacy that he does not want," it says. "As the past fuses with the present, father and son face an ominous truth: sometimes, darkness originates where you least expect it."

What's the reaction been so far?

Less than 24 hours after the announcement, the script had already topped the charts on both Amazon's and Waterstone's book lists.

Waterstone's chief executive James Daunt said there are "no sweeter three words to the ears of a bookseller than 'the eighth story'".

He added: "Younger booksellers now face, of course, the dubious prospect of their older colleagues rolling out war stories of Harry Potter launches for the next five months. On 31 July, we will put these into the shade."

Little, Brown have cautioned that the script is a "special rehearsal edition" of the text used during preview performances of the show ahead of its official opening. That means that after the preview period ends, fans can expect another finalised collector's edition to be released.

All this hype around the announcement should come as no surprise, however, as Harry Potter and the Cursed Child was widely anticipated by fans: when tickets for the play were released, the show sold out in just eight hours, with more than 175,000 tickets bought.

Is it really an eighth book?

Fans have been rejoicing over what they see as another book in the Harry Potter series. Rowling, however, was quick to dismiss that notion:

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child casts black Hermione

22 December 2016

The upcoming stage production of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child has cast a black actress to play Hermione – and it's what many fans have been waiting for.

The eagerly anticipated, two-part play, co-written by Jack Thorne and director John Tiffany, is based on an original JK Rowling story. It is set 19 years after the end of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, and will focus on Harry's youngest son Albus Severus.

Producers have now announced the cast, reports the BBC and actress Noma Dumezweni, who recently stepped in at the last minute to replace Kim Cattrall in Linda at the Royal Court, will play the adult Hermione Granger.

The Swaziland-born, Dumezweni, 45, also won a best supporting actress Olivier award in 2005 for her role in A Raisin in the Sun.

She will be joined by Jamie Parker, who is currently starring in the West End show Guys and Dolls, as an adult Harry. London Road star Paul Thornley completes the trio as Ron Weasley.

But it's the news of Noma's role that has got people talking, and it seems that JK Rowling and fans are pleased.

When the casting was announced, JK Rowling responded to fans' questions of how she felt about "black Hermione" with this tweet: "Canon: brown eyes, frizzy hair and very clever. White skin was never specified. Rowling loves black Hermione."

The casting of a black actress as Hermione was not entirely unexpected for some readers though, says Sarah Begley in Time. She notes that, for years, a community of readers has wondered whether Hermione Granger was indeed written as a black or mixed-race character all along.

Begley points to blogs such as Black Girl Dangerous, which suggest that women of colour identify with Hermione, and notes that fans have long discussed her race on social media. Then, in February, a Buzzfeed post on fan art depicted Hermione as black.

Some commentators, such as Stephen Bush at the New Statesman, believed Hermione was black since first reading the books. She wows her fellow pupils at the Yule Ball in Goblet of Fire by straightening her hair, says Bush, "which was, almost without exception, how in my part of East London, everyone's older sister prepared for a night out".

Bush adds that he was shocked when white actress Emma Watson was cast in the role, and asked, "How could Hermione be white?"

On Vulture Ira Madison III describes the casting as "exciting" and says it is an important expansion of the Potter universe. Madison says that even if Rowling never specified Hermione as black, and didn't object to the casting of Emma Watson, it is easy to understand why black readers, "searching for representation in the mostly white universe of young-adult fiction, imagine the character to be like themselves".

But let's not get carried away, says Kayleigh Anne in The Independent. Rowling's tweets about Hermione's race "were an afterthought", says Anne. "But it's OK," she adds, acknowledging Rowling for "helping to add diversity to the franchise".

A new Harry Potter play, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, has sent fans potty, with tickets selling out within hours, fans complaining about online sales shambles and profiteering resellers, and producers already announcing an extended run.

So what is the play about?

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is a two-part stage play, co-written by Jack Thorne and director John Tiffany, and based on an original JK Rowling story.

Not much information has been released so far about the content of the play, but it will be a sequel to the original book series. Set 19 years after the end of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, it will focus on Harry's youngest son Albus Severus.

According to producers it will see Harry as an overworked employee of the Ministry of Magic, a husband and father of three children.

His youngest son Albus has to take on the weight of the family legacy, and "both father and son learn the uncomfortable truth: sometimes, darkness comes from unexpected places".

Billed as the "eighth Harry Potter story and the first official Harry Potter story to be presented on stage", the two-part play is set to make its world premiere at the Palace Theatre in London's West End on 7 June 2016.

The ticket Fiasco

Priority booking for the stage show, originally scheduled to run from June to September, opened on Wednesday morning, prompting an online frenzy as fans tried to get their hands on the first batch of tickets.

Buyers had to be pre-registered at the play's official website at Nimax to even be able to attempt to purchase the priority tickets, reports MTV News. They then had to wait in a pre-queue line before the official 11.00am start time.

One fan tweeted: "Only English people would create a pre-queue to the queue."

The show sold more than 175,000 tickets in just eight hours and some appeared on re-sale ticket websites soon after, priced at more than £1,000.

This prompted the play's official Twitter account to warn buyers not to resell their tickets on alternative platforms, as patrons would not be admitted into the theatre.

After selling out tickets for the first booking period from 7 June to 18 September producers quickly extended the season to January 2017, but this didn't stop fans complaining about long online waiting times and glitches, reports the BBC.

One fan, Em Maree wrote: "Finally got my three tickets for the #CursedChild play but am shocked by the shambles that was the booking. 4 hours is a joke!"

Another tweeted: "This play better blow my mind @jk_rowling @HPPlayLDN ... Never been so stressed buying tickets before #CursedChild."

Are there any tickets left?

Yes, don't panic, producers have promised more tickets will be released when the general sale begins on Friday 30 October.

So how do you get them?

Tickets for the two-part play, starting from £30, will go on general sale tomorrow via Nimax Theatres and ATG Tickets websites. Once tickets sell out, there will be a weekly and daily lottery for all performances nearer the time.

In addition, four special preview performances are planned for the end of May 2016 – details of where and how to obtain these tickets will be announced at a later date.

Both parts are designed to be watched in the same day – matinee and evening – or on two consecutive nights.

Critics have hailed Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them as spectacular, magical and escapist fun – but does it also offer a dig at real world politics?

The film, which has premiered in New York, is a scriptwriting debut for Harry Potter author JK Rowling. It stars Eddie Redmayne as young wizard Newt Scamander, who arrives in 1920s New York to further his study of magical creatures. When an accident releases his curious beasts into the unsuspecting muggle (non-magical) population, he unwittingly threatens to destroy the uneasy peace between the magical and non-magical communities.

It co-stars Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Carmen Ejogo and Colin Farrell.

But does this fantasy romp about a magical zookeeper also contain a commentary on our current political climate? Some critics think so.

Robbie Collin at the Daily Telegraph says that "possibly by accident, but probably not", the spectacular Fantastic Beasts has also turned out to be "the most unexpectedly relevant blockbuster of 2016". It may take place in the build-up to the Great Depression, says the critic, but its vision of an America "caught in the jaws of fear and paranoia" has the ring of the here and now.

The setting, Collin explains, is a city "seething with suspicion", with pamphleteers pressing for a "Second Salem" (witch trials) to keep the country's magic-users in check. There's even a "smirking son of privilege" running for congress with the campaign slogan "America's Future".

It's a spectacular feat of world building, concludes Collin, who adds: "Keep it coming."

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Front Row, the film's director David Yates admits that in the wake of Donald Trump being elected and the UK's vote to leave the European Union it is "inevitable that those things resonate and impact" on the film.

Producer David Heyman added: "These issues that we are talking about being very current and resonant are actually very timeless, that's something we probably need to pay attention to."

Peter Bradshaw at The Guardian says that "enchanter" JK Rowling has "come storming back to the world of magic in a shower of supernatural sparks" with "a glorious fantasy-romance adventure". On a strictly escapist level, however, the critic notes that Fantastic Beasts "may be compromised by making one of its characters an obnoxious rich New York chump", reliant on his father's money and nursing political ambitions.

But there's a lovely performance from Redmayne as the diffident wizarding Brit who causes chaos with his bagful of exotic creatures, adds Bradshaw. His openness and likeability, and "the sheer generosity of movie-making energy", make this "an early Christmas treat".

Brian Viner in the Daily Mail agrees. He says "the fantastical parallel universe created by JK Rowling never felt quite so in tune with our own as it does in this exhilarating Harry Potter spin-off".

"For all its wit and spectacle", notes the critic, the film "has plenty to say about racial prejudice, establishment stooges and the abuse of power". And being a Rowling story, there are destructive forces of darkness to contend with, including a "splendidly sinister" anti-magic fundamentalist (Samantha Morton) and a fleeting appearance from Johnny Depp as rogue wizard Gellert Grindelwald.

But the emphasis throughout is on fun, says Viner who concludes that this is "marvellous escapism" after all.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is released in the UK on 18 November.

Fantastic Beasts: new 'magical' trailer for Harry Potter spin-off

15 December 2015

The first trailer for JK Rowling's Harry Potter spin-off film Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them has appeared.

Directed by David Yates – who also helmed some of the Harry Potter films – Fantastic Beasts features Redmayne in the starring role of 'magizoologist' Newt Scamander, who in 1926 has just completed a global trip to collect and document a collection of magical creatures.

The teaser, which is one minute and 53 seconds long, shows Scamander arriving in New York with a magical suitcase, "full of magical creatures".

After he leaves the suitcase open, in his words, "just a smidge", some of the creatures escape, prompting an adventurous caper.

Other cast members include Katherine Waterson, Alison Sudol, Tony-Award-winner Dan Fogler, Ezra Miller and Samantha Morton.

Although the film will not be released until November 2016, anticipation for it is already considerable. On Twitter, #FantasticsBeastsTrailer was trending within minutes of the promo's release.

Metro says the trailer "looks magic", while Hollywood Reporter said it "reminds fans that magic and the impossible are all around us - as long as you know where to look".

Entertainment Weekly sums up the excitement: "It's here. It's here. It's finally here." But Empire gives a more tepid response, noting that "there's no beasts, fantastic or otherwise", although there are "familiar themes".

With Warner Bros marketing department keen to keep much of the film under wraps until nearer the release date, fans can likely expect more dramatic teasers next year.

JK Rowling's Fantastic Beasts movie: what can we expect?

10 June

Excitement among fans for the film adaptation of JK Rowling's Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them has reached fever pitch across the Atlantic after the author hinted that it may feature an "American Hogwarts".

Rowling dropped the tantalising titbit during a fan Q&A on Twitter, revealing that the movie will feature students from an as-yet-unnamed American school of witchcraft and wizardry, inspired by Native American culture.

So, apart from a new influx of wizards from across the pond, what can viewers expect from the new film?

What's it all about?

Harry Potter fans will know Fantastic Beasts as one of the textbooks on the Hogwarts reading list. In 2001, Rowling published a real version of the compendium to raise money for Comic Relief, and after the success of the Harry Potter franchise it was only a matter of time before movie executives turned their attention to the spin-off. The film is set to be released in November 2016.

Plot details are scant so far, but the movie will follow the exploits of the textbook's author, intrepid magiczoologist Newt Scamander. An expert in magical creatures from centaurs to hippogriffs, Newt has been described by Rowling as "a Hufflepuff with guts". Last year, Rowling tweeted an anagram revealing a clue to the film's plotline which sent fans into a frenzy as they rushed to decipher the cryptic message. The unscrambled tweet read: "Newt Scamander only meant to stay in New York for a few hours", with Rowling adding that "circumstances ensured that he remained". What exactly those circumstances are remains to be seen, as only a handful of people are said to have laid eyes on the closely-guarded script.

How does it link in with the Harry Potter novels?

As you can probably guess from the Fantastic Beasts textbook's appearance in the Harry Potter series, Newt's globetrotting adventures are set well before the boy wizard and pals arrive at Hogwarts. In fact, hardcore fans may recall that in the epilogue to the final novel, Harry's eccentric classmate Luna was revealed to have married Newt's grandson, Rolf. Rowling has been keen to stress that Fantastic Beasts is not a prequel to Harry Potter, but rather an "extension" of the wizarding world. However, given the advanced age of some of the Hogwarts faculty, perhaps fans shouldn't rule out a surprise cameo from a young Dumbledore or Hagrid.

There are off-screen links with the Harry Potter franchise, too. The new project will be helmed by David Yates, who directed the final four Harry Potter movies, and produced by David Heyman, who also produced all eight Potter films. The franchise's screenwriter Steve Kloves has been working with Rowling on the film's script, the author's first foray into writing for the screen.

Who's starring in it?

Freshly-minted Oscar winner Eddie Redmayne was confirmed last week in the lead role of Newt Scamander, beating out contenders including as Nicholas Hoult and Matt Smith. Two other main characters – sisters Queenie and Tina – are yet to be cast, but The Wrap reports that Saoirse Ronan, Dakota Fanning and Kate Upton are among the actresses being courted for the roles.

Will there be a sequel?

Unsurprisingly, given the massive success of the Harry Potter franchise, "at least" two sequels are planned, according to the Daily Telegraph. There are also rumours that Rowling's other charity spin-off, Quidditch Through the Ages, might be next in line for the big screen treatment. In any case, it appears that Harry Potter fans won't have to worry about saying goodbye to the wizarding world for years to come.

A new television mini-series based on J.K. Rowling's best-selling novel, The Casual Vacancy, will screen on BBC One this Sunday night. The Casual Vacancy, published in 2012, was Rowling's first adult novel following her phenomenally successful Harry Potter children's book series.

It sold well but received mixed reviews when it was released, with one Telegraph writer calling it “so howlingly bleak that it makes Thomas Hardy look like PG Wodehouse”.The story was also a little too dark for the BBC, and producers at the broadcaster have reportedly taken some liberties with the narrative. So what can viewers expect?

The Daily Mail reports that programme makers decided Rowling's story was 'grim' for the small screen - so they rewrote the ending for Sunday night audiences. But the three-part drama, starring Sir Michael Gambon, Keeley Hawes and Rory Kinnear, still involves scenes of rape, drug abuse and racism.

Screenwriter Sarah Phelps said: “It’s still heartbreaking, but I had to find some kind of redemptive moment at the end, that sense that after the tragedy, someone gets to stand with a slightly straighter back.”

But changes to the storyline have not been limited to the ending, says the Mail. Questions have been raised over other edits to the plot, which some have suggested were made in order "to ramp up left-wing issues weeks before the General Election". The drama does not mention any political parties but critics say the battle over Sweetlove House is "a thinly disguised attack on the Government's welfare cuts" in the lead up to the May election.

Politics aside, episode one starts gently, says Kasia Delgado also in the Radio Times, with a camera swooping over the English countryside, "but soon the colossal cracks begin to show and things get very dark indeed".

Delgado describes the show as: "Beautifully shot, brilliantly acted and swarming with vivid characters."

Viewers can make up their own mind when the series airs, BBC One, Sunday 9pm.

The first of seven illustrated editions of JK Rowling's Harry Potter series is set for release in October, with artwork by the award-winning British illustrator Jim Kay.

The full colour books will be released over the next few years, with Kay committed to illustrating them all.

In an interview with The Guardian, Kay described the task of trying to reimagine the central characters including Harry Potter, Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley, as "an implosion of brain-freezing terror".

The British illustrator, famed for his award-winning book A Monster Calls, says that the job was "extremely exciting", but adds that the role came with "huge responsibility".

"From my point of view it is, without doubt, the best commission you can be given," Kay said. "I'm a bit of a control freak, so to be given the opportunity to design the characters, the clothing the architecture and landscapes to possibly the most expansive fantasy world in children's literature, well let's just say I'm extremely excited about it. However, I am also mindful of the huge responsibility this represents, I just want to make sure I do the best job I possibly can."

The first book Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is due to be published in the UK, US and Australia in October 2015. See the new illustrations below (Illustrations: Jim Kay/PR).

Harry Potter

Draco Malfoy

Hermione Granger

Rubeus Hagrid

Ron Weasley

A cryptic tweet from author JK Rowling sparked a flurry of speculation that she was planning a return to the world of Harry Potter, although hopes that the wizard himself was set to make a return were later dashed.

The tweet that generated all the fuss, and was soon deciphered, read: "Cry, foe! Run amok! Fa awry! My wand won't tolerate this nonsense".

A number of Rowling's followers rightly guessed that the enigmatic message was an anagram, with one early solution to the puzzle generating particular excitement: "Harry Returns! Won't say any details now! A week off! No comment."

As the tweet spread, and fans piled in with suggestions of their own, Rowling helped guide the discussions, offering hints to people who were getting close to solving the puzzle. She said one fan was getting "much warmer" with the guess "Newt Scamander's History of New York Fauna: One town, my tale".

Later she sent a more pointed tweet with the hashtag "#helpfulhint" that read: "The solution is the first sentence of a synopsis of Newt's story. It isn't part of the script, but sets the scene."

Eventually Rowling showed her hand, revealing that the anagram referred to a new film focusing on the fictional 'magizoologist' Newt Scamander, who appears in the Harry Potter books. The film will be set in New York, 70 years before the events of the original Potter series. The final revelation came as something of an anticlimax, the Daily Telegraph said, "dashing fans' hopes that Potter would return".

The follower who finally solved the anagram was Emily Strong – a PhD student at the University of Sheffield - who describes herself as a "professional nerd and science geek" and a lover of "all things Potter". Strong tweeted the solution at the Harry Potter author on Tuesday afternoon: "Newt Scamander only meant to stay in New York for a few hours."

Rowling wrote back within two minutes confirming that the solution was correct, thanking fans for their interest and noting that a number of the guesses were "spookily close to the script".

JK Rowling has thrown her support behind the campaign against Scottish independence, donating £1m to Better Together. Her donation is the largest single gift given to the Better Together campaign, run by former Labour chancellor Alistair Darling. In a statement on her website, Rowling, who has lived in Scotland for 21 years, said she came to the question of independence with an "open mind" but the more she listened to the Yes campaign, the more she worried about its "minimisation and even denial of risks". The Harry Potter author is one of several celebrities to publically declare their views on the future of Scotland:

No to Scottish independence

David Tennant

"I had no great sense of nationalism when I was in Scotland, and I could never understand why the SNP were banging on about it. I was like, why do we want to become smaller? Surely we want to expand and look outward? Let's go into Europe and be one big happy family!"

JK Rowling

"This separation will not be quick and clean: it will take microsurgery to disentangle three centuries of close interdependence, after which we will have to deal with three bitter neighbours."

Billy Connolly

"I don't believe in having more layers of government that ordinary people will have to pay for. I think it's time for people to get together, not split apart."

Rod Stewart

"I'd hate to see the Union broken after all these years — and I don't think it will happen."

Emma Thompson

"Why insist on building a new border between human beings in an ever-shrinking world where we are still struggling to live alongside each other?"

Yes to Scottish independence

Sean Connery

"As a Scot and as someone with a lifelong love for both Scotland and the arts, I believe the opportunity of independence is too good to miss."

Irvine Welsh

"I'm totally for independence, totally. I think everyone is, even the unionists. It's the process which is being argued about, not the principle."

Alan Cumming

"The Yes campaign for Scottish independence is, to me, the epitome of hope, optimism and positivity and I believe that independence is best for Scotland."

Brian Cox

"This whole argument has nothing to do with the pound. It’s not about any of these things they say are important; it's about the Scottish people trying to join up the dots back to the Treaty of Arbroath, and trying to get back to egalitarian principles, which is so present in the Scottish character."

Frankie Boyle

"It's an 'aye' from me, man."

Click here for a full summary of the pros and cons of Scottish independence