J.K. Rowling announces an eighth Harry Potter book

archive.is/DXLx8
>When die-hard “Harry Potter” fans first heard that J.K. Rowling was writing a sequel to her beloved seven-part series, they couldn’t wait to get their hands on the book. Then they realized the sequel wasn’t going to be released in book form — she had turned it into a play.
>“Harry Potter and the Cursed Child” is set to debut in London at the Palace Theatre on the day before Harry’s birthday, July 30.
>But today, Rowling announced that the script of the play will in fact be released as a two-part book, at 12:01 a.m. on July 31, 2016.
>“Pottermore is proud to be a key part of the multi-platform effort that will allow the epic eighth Harry Potter story to be read and enjoyed by a wider, global audience,” said Susan L. Jurevics, chief executive officer of J.K. Rowling’s online home base Pottermore in an announcement on the site.
>The play was not written by Rowling herself. English playwright Jack Thorne wrote the script based on “an original new story” Rowling wrote with Thorne and theater director John Tiffany but never released as a book. It is set 19 years after the end of “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” the series’ last book.
>In “Harry Pottter and the Cursed Child,” Albus struggles “with the weight of a family legacy he never wanted,” the announcement said. “As past and present fuse ominously, both father and son learn the uncomfortable truth: Sometimes darkness comes from unexpected places.”
>These addendums are the cause of much debate among fans. Some see them as Rowling’s aim to please her ginormous worldwide fanbase; others say it’s an attempt to squeeze more money out of a franchise that has already collected billions.

Other urls found in this thread:

scaruffi.com/fiction/best100.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>you will never escape your shitty muggle life by being invited to attend Hogwarts
>you will never rush through the barrier at King's Cross station and find a seat next to a Hermione-esque qt
>you will never walk around a giant castle in robes all day
>you will never lie tucked up in bed in your small stone-floored dorm at night as the wind and rain thrashes outside
>you will never sit with your qt crush by the fire in the Gryffindor common room
>you will never nervously make your way down to the great hall for the Yuletide Ball and find your qt crush waiting for you with her friends
>you will never browse a shop selling magical books with your qt gf in Diagon Alley
>you will never attend a feast in the great hall
>you will never eat breakfast in the great hall and have your pet owl deliver some comfy winter clothes from back home
>you will never sneak out at night to make out with your shy Hufflepuff girlfriend
>you will never nervously stand in front of the whole school before being sorted into your desired house
>you will never solve mysteries with your buddies
>you will never get the rare salty coin bean from Bertie Bott's Every Flavour Jelly Belly Beans
>you will never defend yourself against a dementor
>you will never attend the Quidditch World Cup
>you will never be befriended by a giant eccentric gatekeeper
>you will never celebrate the end of the O.W.L exams by getting drunk with your qt gf and listening to post-Goblin core music in your dorm
>you will never be forced to stay at Hogwarts over the Christmas break and spend your time in the library reading in silence and watching the snow falling through the leaded windows
>you will never taste butterbear
>you will never have a calm, compassionate and humorous headmaster to serve as the father figure you never had

>you will never shitpost on /b/ in 2009 again

>Gryffindor

scoff

don't give a shit.
You can't milk it any more

>you will never ... spend your time in the library reading in silence and watching the snow falling through the leaded windows
Climate change man. That's the real magic.

Also I really hope she milks it until it's dead and everyone tries to forget this franchise ever existed.

Nobody will forget Harry Potter. It's unironically the best book franchise of all time. The fact we are alive at a time JK Rowling is alive is something future generations will considering amazing. Truly we are blessed.

>post-Goblin core
mudblood taste confirmed
post-Centaur core is the true music for wizards

Truly we are biased

kys

I would have bought a copy before she turned Hermione into a nigger and Dumbledore into a faggot. She can suck my muggle dick.

Umm actually no. She is the best selling author of all time, and the film franchise based on her books are the second best selling of all time. She has been translated into pretty much every language at this point. Her words have defined the childhoods of countless millions, all of whom have lived into adulthood holding dear to them the moral guidance offered in the books themselves, which honor virtue, courage, respect, loyalty and love as things every child should value. JK Rowling is the greatest writer of all time, and her impact is such that Shakespeare will in the future be remembered with as much respect as she is, not for the same reasons but for the essential value of their respective works.

Wow do you actually think you're accomplishing anything by talking that way? It's so rude. I'm in Gryffindor and I can tell you for a fact that there are many people of colour both in my house and the other three houses, and everyone gets on fine regardless of their ethnicity. I wish this was something muggles could understand but whatever, it just bothers me when I come on here and get reminded of what life is like outside of Hogwarts.

The fact that so many anons still name JK Rowling as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" author ever only tells you how far literature still is from becoming a serious art.

Tl;dr - she was a welfare loving dipshit and if you like her books you should an hero. Her only accomplishment is pulling the greatest fraud over the millions of dumbasses who read her stupid shit.

Umm actually she was a single mother who struggled hard to find work while reluctantly claiming welfare benefits. She also worked during that period as a filing clerk and was preparing to become a school teacher around the time the first book was accepted by literary agent. If you're going to diss her at least get you're freakin facts straight seriously.

I heard from a source that she worked as a prostiute down in Soho. I wouldn't put a single dime into this whore's pocket. In fact most people hate her. Everyone who reads her books says their garbage and that you shouldn't buy them.

> on welfare while studying and working

>You will never magically rape a centaur.
>You will never magically rape a unicorn.
>You will never magically rape a pegasus.
>You will never magically rape a mermaid.
>You will never magically rape a house elf.
>You will never magically rape a thestral.
>You will never magically rape a gryffon.
>You will never magically rape the womping willow.
>You will never magically rape a dementor.
>You will never magically rape a giant spider.
>You will never magically rape a phoenix.
>You will never magically rape a basilisk.
>You will never magically rape a dragon.
>You will never magically rape a muggle.
>You will never magically rape Hermione.

>You will never magically rape Hermione
"Peh-dee-car-*bo*

My most memorable experience with the Harry Potter series was the time I had a fever while reading one of the books and ended up throwing up on the book while I was reading it.

How long did it take you to notice?

OH FUCKING SHIT
A FUCKING HARRY POTTER PLAY

HOW WOULD YOU EVEN WRITE A FUCKING HARRY POTTER PLAY

>before she turned Hermione into a nigger
what the fuck are you on about m8

...

>HOW WOULD YOU EVEN WRITE A FUCKING HARRY POTTER PLAY
Rowling doesn't know either if it makes you feel better, she paid someone else to write it.

...

OLOLOLOLOL
KEKEKEKEKEK

FUCKING SANDMIONE

She's changed

For people who hate Harry Potter you guys sure care about its legacy a lot

Snape and Dumbledoor used to be Japanese?

/thread

OLOLOL I'M FUCKING DONE

I REPEAT,

SAND FUCKING MIONE

THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE THAT I'LL GET TO MY CHILDHOOD HARRY POTTER BOOKS IN A WEEK OR TWO IN ORDER TO BURN THEM.
IF YOU RETARDS WANT A ROAST BLACK HERMIONE YOU'LL GET IT


of course we care faggot, #childhood FUCKING RUINED

I dunno man. It looks like Dobby is not keen on Harry touching him tho.

>subtle Scaruffi reference
I don't know if I should applaud or link you to /mu/.

...

He isn't just a music critic
scaruffi.com/fiction/best100.html

Stick a glock in your mouth and pull the trigger.

There's nothing subtle about it.

>tfw you have to choose between the hating Harry Potter meme and the getting unreasonably angry at racebait meme

These are all comfy af (as fuck). You sound like you need a gf user. *blushes*

brékkek kékkek

About the whole black hermione non-issue:
There have been instances of male characters played by females as there have been instances of female characters played by males. Any theater guy will tell you that. Race also doesn't matter, why? Because it's fiction. Read a theory book. Magic doesn't exist. It's a play.

Race also doesn't matter, why? Because it's fiction.

That's exactly WHY it matters.
Or would you argue that the only place it matters is actually the real world? Fucking racist

For example, this woman played Hamlet. She's one of the most famous french actresses of All Time. If you're a burger, you can see her star on the holywood walk of fame.

I'm currently working on a political science fiction dystopia novel and every character has an exact phenotype of race, gender, species, hair color, religion and age.
To replace characters with those who do not fit is to betray the source material and not true to it.

No, I get your point. Theatrefags like mixing it up. Okay.

Now explain to me why that isn't racist? Elaborating that it doesn't matter "because it's fiction"?
And btw I'm well aware that this is a stock theatrefag response, and not a very deeply personal position of yours, so sorry if I seem overly personally combative.

In your case yes. Not in every case.

I am aware that the more hardcore sjws and other tumblr people might take this fight personally, in a mirror response to the /pol/ guys's outrage.

However, I have to agree on the form of what the tumblrs are saying. It doesn't matter if the actress who plays Hermione is black, it oesn't matter ONLY if she wasn't chosen specifically because she is black. It is possible that whoever had to pick actors for the play specifically did that, to appeal to the tumblrs, who usually like Harry Potter. It's the perfect match really.

Sorry if my answer doesn't seem structured or targeted towards our discussion, i'm just throwing out ideas here.
On JK Rowling's answer to the whole thing, I think she missed something. She should have said, to be 100% honest, that Hermione is a character of fiction and thus can be represented by anyone, not that "guise she may have been black all along!"

Also the entire affaire seems stale because for one it's Harry Potter we're talking about () and for two the movies made sure to engrave in our memories the image of the actress who plays Hermione BEING Hermione (I forget her name but I have pics, oh yes the pics).

I'm disappointed you didn't do a sci fi version of Beckett's "women don't have prostates" line.

"Human females lack ovipositors"?

>french
there's your problem

No one cares about race. Unless it's white people. Everything they do is evil and to preserve and better their whiteness.

Well idk then. I understand that the predominant position of theatres is currently "it's fiction so race doesn't matter", but I just still can't grasp how it doesn't only make it more racist.

Of course race should matter. The race of a main character is an immanent part of a story.1 2
Otherwise no detail matters and all characters are completely identical and none have anything CHARACTERISTIC and no story can ever be achieved.

Assuming that ALL OTHER DETAILS matter, but for some reason only RACE doesn't matter separates race and implies that the detail of race DOES merit special treatment.


----
1and btw in Harry Potter no-one who's white is mentioned to be white, whereas black people are always mentioned to be black, and it's an overtly bigoted version of UK who hates half-bloods, plus EIGHT FUCKING MOVIES came out with a pretty big J.K. Rowling involvement so no fucking chance in hell that Hermione had secretly been black all along.

2I could maybe understand racial experimentation in Shakespeare plays, but this is a fucking current age work. You can't culturally reframe it because it's the same fucking culture, therefore you're butchering the art.

>the predominant position of theatres is currently "it's fiction so race doesn't matter"
not only race, but gender and even relevance has been put to the question for quite a while by theater


>The race of a main character is an immanent part of a story
not in this case. As we saw, JK Rowling didn't write in her book that Hermione was black. It doesn't matter to the story, whatever her drawings might >imply


>EIGHT FUCKING MOVIES came out with a pretty big J.K. Rowling involvement so no fucking chance in hell that Hermione had secretly been black all along
rowling was involved as she should be in the making of her movies, and her response to the affair was bad but we already got over that. But do not mix movie and book. Over time, different actors play the same character. Should Hermione only always be played by a Emma Watson lookalike?


>this is a fucking current age work. You can't culturally reframe it because it's the same fucking culture, therefore you're butchering the art.
are you supporting the statement that it is a cultural change to cast a black person in the place of a white character? England has been culturally diverse for some time now.

Whatever the flaws JK Rowling might have worked into her books (and you won't catch me at that godawful play), it's not fair to grasp the easy argument of white/black, especially if you're into theater and to a certain extent literature. Otherwise you'd never read translations.

Hey I'm the guy who wrote that please if you are a girl please reply to this post and I will literally go out with you and hold your hand and watch your home videos and look at pictures of your family from when you were younger and kiss you and hold you closely while we sleep.

I'm actually a guy so your post is a bit gay but know that inside I dream of all the things you wrote.

>Should Hermione only always be played by a Emma Watson lookalike?
well of course not, and maybe in theatre small facial features like eye color wouldn't matter, but skin tone is pretty fucking obvious even from 20 feet away.

>not only race, but gender and even relevance has been put to the question for quite a while by theater
I can't argue with this. It is my understanding that it goes against the nature of modern theatre to be extremely intellectualistic and argumentative, but I don't quite know if it's acceptable for theatre to ask but refuse to also offer their own answer on whether those things matter or not.
Because if they only put it to the question, the neo-fascist political-corectness-indoctrinating tumblrinas will be happy to answer it for them.

>not in this case. As we saw, JK Rowling didn't write in her book that Hermione was black
yes but that's what I'm saying. Since it wasn't explicitely pointed out, there's a great opportunity for a formalistic escape from responsibility, but the fact is that 100% of people who has ever read the book imagined Hermione as white. I don't even need to mix movie and book.

>are you supporting the statement that it is a cultural change to cast a black person in the place of a white character? England has been culturally diverse for some time now.
I am fully supporting that statement because cultural diversity doesn't automatically mean cultural equality. And if you want to tell me that Hermione's parents somehow suddenly becoming owners of an Indian cuisine restaurant doesn't affect the story, well I think that's just pure political correctness.
What her parents do is arbitrary anyways, but so is anything else. A story is nothing but the sum of its individually unimportant details.

>Sorry for starting the inevitable decline in post size. I hope this doesn't devolve to name-calling.
Should a play about Julius Caesar's last supper before he was murdered be written, represented and read only in latin?

No, it would be perfectly fine for an English playwright to hypothetically take that story and write a play in English, nor would it matter if that play centuries later got translated into 50 different languages. But that's not the same thing.

Characters in the story of Julius Caesar are homogenous by nation. They're all Roman. Therefore they could all be English, or American, or Russian or whatever.

But if you were to produce a Julius Caesar by taking Shakespeare's text, and not touching the language in any way except that the character of Julius Caesar, and that character only, spoke in ebonics, then yeah -- that would change the story.

Yes. Shakespeare was a fucking pleb hack.

I honestly don't care if it tickles your autism or w/e. It stinks of tokenism to my mind, and it's also tokenism that happens to have landed on the female lead. We're one step away from "I never said Hermione *wasn't* wheelchair bound" a la many late 90s Saturday morning cartoons. It just gives the impression that maybe casting wasn't quite so wide open when there's a single change out of many possible in this sort of thing.

Also don't like the "I never said" bs, she does describe Hermione's skin tone. Now she's making out that being vague about details so much that she herself forgets the details is somehow progressive or some shit.

then, should a theater adaptation always strive to represent the story it adapts as faithfully as possible?

nah her accomplishment is being the mainstream progenitor of series writing

But it doesn't *adapt* a story.
It *produces* a stageplay.

The stageplay is the part where the story gets adapted.

I would literally have no problem if you rip off shakespeare's play, change a few things, and put your own name on it as the playwright, then go and produce that newly made stageplay.

that's what The King's Men did too, Shakespeare was their playwright in exactly the aforementioned sense.

(still being non-hostile, because this is a good discussion; I shouldn't have to write this, what has Veeky Forums made of me?)
Are you saying that it would be ok to have a black hermione if the play wasn't the "official", Rowling-endorsed, almost "canon" play that it is?
If yes, how do you reconcile this fact with this: Rowling accepts black Hermione (in truth, I can see why she accepts: she doesn't really have a choice).

Furthermore, if Rowling is wrong to endorse it but is obligated to (if she somehow demanded a lighter actor for Hermione, she would get a huge backlash), isn't your view of this whole affair contradicted by mere facts?and what changes to the theatre could go around this?

>it would be ok by you if the play wasn't the "official"
Basically yeah. We've seen worse fan fiction.

>isn't your view of this whole affair contradicted by mere facts?
I don't understand the question, sry. You mean, my view is contradicted because JK Rowling herself said it was ok?

I don't know for certain about any potential systematic changes to the theatre. I am pretty much under the somewhat conspiracistic assumption that people involved in these black-actors-cast-in-white-roles productions are well aware of the political implications of what they're doing, and that they're intentionally abusing the "theatre is apolitical" mentality argument as a defense.
Regardless of whether that were the case or not, the only obvious way for theatres to not participate in (hopefully quickly passing age of) P.C. propaganda, is to do the political opposite of that the P.C. edgelords would want i.e. be conservative.

And the way to be *conservative* in producing plays, is to not touch the play one bit. (except for trimming lines and similar technical stuff of course, that's up to the actors and the director, but I mean, not try to change the themes of the play anyhow.

At least if you get a playwright to put his name on the unofficial play, you allow the theatre itself to remain pure from propagandism, but you also allow people to judge the play itself from a literary critic standpoint -- which is a very argumentative and unforgiving standpoint when it comes to how the play's political message plays into the current trends.

It would be a very good compartmentalization.

P.S. it is very possible that I misunderstood your question, so then pls explain it to me again, I'm drifting away to sleep slowly but this is a very fulfilling discussion indeed so I'd really like to capitalize upon it.

Not him but I want to interject...

What you talk about is actually pretty much impossible in contemporary theater. You want accuracy but nobody who actually works in theaters does. Actors and directors want to express themselves. What if a legitimately great black actor wanted to play a Shakespeare character who wasn't Othello - Hamlet, for example? Do you truly want to deny someone's need for expression to preserve the accuracy? Speaking from personal experience, these "inaccurate" actors can be just as good as accurate ones. And you yourself don't want too much accuracy - having boys play women like in Shakespeare's time is ridiculous.

Just saying - I live in an irrelevant Slavic country and the local approach to theater might be different from the one in Anglo countries, so maybe my conclusions don't apply elsewhere.

>>you will never celebrate the end of the O.W.L exams by getting drunk with your qt gf and listening to post-Goblin core music in your dorm
Phew. I don't even know that feel, but I want to.

Harry Potter and the Half-Baked Premise

>both father and son learn the uncomfortable truth: Sometimes darkness comes from unexpected places.

Is Harry going to rape Albus?

I'm confused. Are they releasing a manuscript of the play, or a novelization of the play?

She allegedly wrote a novel that was to be released until she employed the screenwriter of let the right one in to adapt it into a stage production.

If I were more cynical I might think this was an exercise in real world market research, and obv to draw out interest.

And they aren't releasing the novel, it's the play the day after the premier

Am I the only one that approves of this?

Not even a fan of Harry Potter, but if you're gonna cash in on the series again and pander to the fans, might as well pull a wildcard and leave the original format. As says, its probably testing the waters a bit and seeing what kind of reaction this will get.

Might as well use fandoms as lab mice.

>that being in any way subtle

>others say it’s an attempt to squeeze more money out of a franchise that has already collected billions.

Yes, the woman who lost her billionaire status through massive charity donations and pays full UK tax on her earnings is concerned that she isn't rich enough. Fucking ridiculous.

>dumbledore into a faggot
wait when did this happen

...

>you will always post this in HP threads

kill yourself, lad

...

>you will never get the rare salty coin bean
You can get the rarest salty milk and coin one.
Just hit me up anytime bud.

Not literature. reported.
absolutely disgusting.

Why.

The ending was fine, why would they release another sequel.

Just let it have a peaceful death.

>actual thinks Harry Potter is literature and not just a cash cow that will be milked until dry

I don't understand how she got the first one published.

I think the problem with the switch should be less about the colour of her skin and more about how she looks like a plague rat.

>quintessential English school girl
>sassy negress

Pick one.
It's a cynical "muh diversity" token to appease retarded SJWs. Then again that's the primary audience for Harry Potter so I don't really care what they do with it.

The other person was a fraud, I am actually a girl.

What kind of fucking faggot is so afraid to face life?

What house does Veeky Forums belong to? Anything other than Slytherin is pleb tier

>not ravenclaw

Pseud.

I've solved plenty of mysteries with my friends mostly homicides but I work as a detective and all my friends are cops

Are people even excited about Harry Potter anymore? Not even the new trilogy set in the past seems to be getting much buzz about it, everyone's reaction either seems apathetic or just don't really care.

>picking the equivalent of Swarthmore over Amherst

toppest of keks

It'll still make a few shekels.
Besides what else is Rowling supposed to do with her time? Write a real novel? Her whole life is literally Harry Potter.

It's only the really hardcore fans that are still interested

>Besides what else is Rowling supposed to do with her time? Write a real novel?
She wrote two and nobody really liked them.

This. Slytherin is for edgelords, hufflepuff is obviously for retards and autists, gryffindor is for SJW libtards. Ravenclaw is for patricians.

GIVE ME MORE MONEY STUPID READERS

Hufflepuff = literal retards
Gryffindor = vapid athletes
Slytherin = elitist fucks
Ravenclaw = Remember the "quirky," insufferable theatre kids from high school, user?

>tfw I never read a single HP book
The series of my childhood were The Famous Five I got from my uncle.

Are you 50?