• Published:April 24th, 2008
• Comments:1 Comment
• Category:Fan Fiction, News Comments

Okay, granted, the headline of this article, covering the legal conflict between Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling and the writer of an unauthorized encyclopedia on her work,is a bit on the provocative side (”Harry Potter storylines are gibberish, judge tells Rowling”), but it’s clear from the article itself what the judge meant. This commentator gets it right:

The headline here is VERY misleading if you read the judge’s actual quote. He said that the book was filled with names and words that WOULD BE gibberish ‘in any OTHER context.’ That is a very factual and simple statement which doesn’t imply ANYTHING about the storyline. I don’t care one way or the other about Harry Potter, but I’m an ex-journalist who hates to see the facts so badly misrepresented.

Of course, why let “reading the article” or “a moment’s worth of thought” get in the way of “knee-jerk reaction?”

Seem the judge isn’t into fiction or fairy stories. Wonder if he reads the Bible.

The judge must not be too bright if he doesn’t understand the books. Definitely has no imagination.

It seems suspicious to me that a judge, who normally reads complex, convoluted legal briefs, would find it difficult to read ‘Harry Potter’. Maybe it’s too straightforward and clearly written for him.

I am a 64 year old male American judge and have read all of the Harry Potter series. […] The judge that calls these books ‘gibberish’ may have a small screw loose or has completely forgotten his childhood. The books are great and much deeper than one would think.

Kids seem to have no trouble following the Potter books. It’s scary that a judge can’t.

Harry Potter is hardly gibberish. Has the judge listened to attorneys trying cases? He lacks imagination…

Hmm…hope there’s room for some non sequitur political commentary:

Gibberish! The book is easily comprehensible to 10 year olds. How did this man get to be a district court judge? Probably a Clinton appointee.

Response is immediate:

Uhhh, no. Reagan.

And then it’s back to calling the judge stupid:

My 9 year old grandson has digested the entire series. He relishes the complexity and challenge.

And I’ll bet Judge Patterson hasn’t read anything substantive outside of a legal brief in decades…

Harry Potter? Complex? and this guy gets to decide whether someone is guilty of a crime…

seriously we need to start uping the skill requirements to be someone with power in this country.

i’ve had minumum wage jobs with people smart enough to understand harry potter.

Well said.