Wednesday, 27 July 2005

Maybe I'm missing something. Bookslut has a piece on a "corrected" version of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, which has allegedly been downloaded over 800,000 times and which has attracted the interest of J K Rowling's lawyers.

Bookslut sources the item to Mobylives, but seems to accept it as true. Mobylives attributes the story to The Watley Review, and, to be fair, appears to be hedging his (hers? its?) bets on authenticity. The Watley Review says of itself:
The Watley Review is dedicated to the production of articles completely without journalistic merit or factual basis, as this would entail leaving our chairs or actually working. Names, places and events are generally fictitious, except for public figures about which we may have heard something down at the pub. All contents are intended as parody and should be construed as such.
The presence in the Harry Potter piece of a quote from S O'Crates of the University of Phaedrus suggests that we are in debatable ground. Either Bookslut has failed to spot the joke, or else Jessa Crispin's irony is too subtle for me. Whichever is the case, this item has alerted me to a new source of satire on the web.


Candy said...

Another clue that this is a satirical article: the ticked-off fan who wrote the revised version of Harry Potter is named Mary Sue.

If you're not sure what that's referring to, Google "Mary Sue fanfic definition" to find out what a Mary Sue is....

Stephen said...

Thanks Candy - I had a feeling that the name was significant but I wasn't sure quite how. "Rudy Stoltz" the Duke professor mentioned in the article, is a character from a Steven Jesse Bernstein story called Face ("the handsomest most popular boy in the school"), but that might just be coincidence.