J.K. Rowling, author of the “Harry Potter” book series, has been a controversial figure online in recent years. Her cancellation has been of great interest to me because of my attachment to the aforementioned “Harry Potter” series growing up. So it is monumental to witness someone of such immense cultural and financial success fall from the public’s eye to such a degree.
Rowling’s controversial stances started on X, formerly Twitter, like many bad celebrity opinions, with an ‘accidental’ liking of a tweet in 2018 that referred to transgender women as “men in dresses.” This snowballed from advocacy for various anti-trans stances to controversial tweets, hyperbolic statements, personally attacking athletes and even establishing a fund with the core mission to exclude trans women from feminist conversations.
However, the breaking point for Rowling’s image came in 2020 when many of the actors from the “Harry Potter” film franchise, like Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Eddie Redmayne, made public statements condemning her remarks. In response, Rowling published a 3,600-word essay on her website to justify her anti-trans stance. These essays made Rowling’s views abundantly clear and indefensible, causing many in the fandom to begin disassociating with the author entirely.
Along with this disassociation came a wave of boycotts — from the “Hogwarts Legacy” videogame to the “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child” stage play — many chose to cut ties with Rowling. Despite the same discourse surrounding the financial effectiveness and the moral queries of boycotts, there are still strong voices within the fandom who choose to stay away from the author entirely to avoid adding lining to Rowling’s pockets.
Personally, growing up with “Harry Potter,” a strong message that I took away from the books was one of multiculturalism and social justice. This message was present throughout the series via protagonists like Hermione Granger defying the “pure-blooded,” racist and classist hierarchy of the traditional wizarding world. It is no surprise, then, that these themes resonated with much of the fandom; many had beliefs aligned with civic engagement and social advocacy, with some fans even creating political non-profit organizations like the “Harry Potter Alliance.”
Seeing that this series, which supposedly encouraged acceptance, has an author who promotes prejudices and bigotry enraged some fans. Thus, a new phenomenon has arisen — a divergence between many in the fandom and the intellectual property.
With the continued boycotts and disassociations, it almost seemed to unite more readers and even encourage more interactions within the fan base, whether through independent fan-run events, increased engagement with fanfiction or participation in online communities. Most of these spaces have publicly condemned Rowling’s transphobia and are actively affirming transgender and non-binary fans, attempting to create a safe space for them in this fandom.
Another aspect of Rowling’s cancellation is a new wave of retrospective criticism of her books, as many fans and readers began picking them apart. Some are highlighting Rowling’s possible prejudice with the names she chooses for her characters of color. Names like Cho Chang for the only Chinese character in the book have been seen as stereotypical and lazy. Moreover, people are also noticing the strong resemblance between the Gringotts Bank goblins in the books and racist Jewish caricatures. Furthermore, a popular sentiment among adult fans is that the series is “poorly written,” as online discussions continue and now grown-up readers look back and critique the books.
The evolution of the “Harry Potter” fandom sets an interesting precedent for the separation of the art from the artist, allowing Potterheads to expand their vibrant, thriving fan base while entirely disconnecting from the artist. Given how big an influence the “Harry Potter” series has had on popular culture globally, the franchise has become distinct from Rowling’s original work. Moreover, along with the cancellation of Rowling came a wave of retrospective criticisms of the series, where fans are allowing themselves to break through the romanticised lens of nostalgia to form genuine critiques of the biased and limited perspectives Rowling perpetuated in her series, many of which were glossed over with the buzz and fame of the franchise.
