JK Rowling’s a jerk

First, she sued possibly her biggest fan over the Harry Potter Lexicon, essentially a concordance to the Harry Potter books that will surely damage the franchise the way Biblical concordances have stopped people from reading the Bible and ruined all of Christianity! Name one modern, famous Christian. I bet you can’t, and it’s all because of the concordance!

Now, however, Ms. Rowling (AKA Mrs. Murray) says that her child cannot be photographed in public! Yesterday, a British court of appeals overturned a ruling against Ms. Rowling in a lawsuit the billionaire author initiated against a publication who wished to print photos of her son. The court’s ruling was that ordinary people would expect a level of privacy when wandering about in public insomuch as they would not expect their child to be photographed.

Really?

Maybe that’s the way it is in England, but in America, you can photograph people in public, famous or not. You cannot reprint without permission if the person is not famous and is clearly the subject of the photograph, but famous people are not held to this same standard (obviously — without such there would be no tabloid press to speak of) and even this standard of privacy in public is not uniform. For the most part, if a photographer takes a photo of you and your child in public at a public event, in a crowd, etc. it’s going to be published, probably whether you like it or not.

Now, about Ms. Rowling: yes, her son was the subject of the photograph, but guess what sweetheart, you are famous, and so is your husband and your children because they are caught in the reflected glow of the light of fame that hangs around you. Sure, when you were a frumpy single mother toiling away in coffee shops at your labor of love while your child napped (if that story’s even true — there is some debate) you never imagined this would be your life. But then your books exploded. Now, you could have kept yourself hidden away like J.D. Salinger, or even just led a ho-hum life like Stephen King or John Grisham, neither of which are photographed constantly despite being their work being guarenteed on the best seller list. Oh no. You got the hair done, the nose fixed, the face lifted or at least botoxed. You’ve had work done, you’ve bought glamour girl clothes, and you’ve gone out in public, seeking that attention that you do deserve. I don’t begrudge you that. You earned it, live it up.

However, just as I’d say to any Hollywood starlet turned mother, you’ve made the bed, and now you have to lie in it. You’re a famous face by your own doing and you cannot try to protect your children from the limelight. It won’t happen. If you’re lucky, you’ll go back to having some sort of cult status and your child will either emulate you with bad writing or just drop off the face of the earth and lead a normal life, like Frieda and Nicholas Hughes, respectively.

But that’s if you’re lucky and if you do your damnedest to stop suing people and just live a quiet, normal life away from all the Hollywood premiers and parties and shit. Fade away and collect your millions every year. If you stay in the spotlight, your children will stay in the spotlight. If you are lucky, your child will be the next Stella McCartney or Sean Lennon. If you are not, your son will be the male version of Paris Hilton.