Harry Potter Mania: The Final Battle
I may have to do another one of these round-ups on Monday to get the post-publication stuff (and the reviews that won’t annoy Rowling by their very existence), but, after that, I never want to hear the words "Harry Potter" in my life again. (Above, Mr. Potter illustrates my mood.)
CNN just realized that Deathly Hallows publishes tomorrow and they haven’t run a bland “it’s coming” story yet. Problem fixed.
The Houston Chonicle runs Potter Story #5A, “these kids grew up while reading the Potter books.”
The Vail Daily News, on the other hand, files #6B, “this wait is killing us.”
The University of North Texas declares that it has professors standing by to comment profoundly on Deathly Hallows at a moment’s notice.
The Business Gazette of Maryland knows where all the good parties are.
Blogcritics has one of those “it doesn’t matter what happens in the outside world, I’m going to have my own special moment with Deathly Hallows and no one can stop me” pieces, this time by Katie McNeill.
Inside Higher Ed goes inside baseball with a story about the media coverage of Harry Potter. And then I comment on a story about the media coverage, here! Coming soon: meta-comments on my comments, and a spiral into utter madness.
Nicholas Clee, at the Guardian blog, is overjoyed to see arrogant UK supermarket chain Asda brought to heel by the power of J.K. Rowling.
The Indianapolis Star puts its money down on the “classics forever” marker.
Michael Burstein is an observant jew, and has been trying to figure out a way to get a copy of Deathly Hallows on publication day (which is also Shabbat, when engaging in commerce is forbidden). Any particularly clever rabbis out there want to help him?
The Belfast Telegram notes that Deathly Hallows goes on sale at midnight tonight. (Doesn’t a “Belfast Telegram” sound like a euphemism for something – like maybe a Molotov cocktail through the letter-slot?)
The Baltimore Sun reports on the odd people who are following Rowling’s demands and not opening their early-release packages of Deathly Hallows.
The Edmonton Sun watches bookstores batten down the hatches and prepare to be boarded.
The Times of India notes that a lot of people will want this book. Thank you, Commander Obvious.
Fox News has a transcript of the “Big Story” segment that talked about the Deathly Hallows internet leak. Has Bill O’Reilly blamed it on Hillary yet?
Publishers Weekly’s Book Maven blog thinks that Michiko Kakutani’s New York Times review of Deathly Hallows was scrubbed of spoilers after initial publication.
Speaking of the Times, only they would be so full of themselves as to actually use the phrase “muggle soirees” in a headline.
E! News thinks that it’s very sad that the mean ol’ New York Times reviewed a book before the author said it was OK to do it. Mean ol’ Times!
The Cleveland Leader has a somewhat less dramatic take on reviewing a book before the publication date.
Reuters tries to sum up the entire history of Harry Potter in one article.
The San Francisco Chronicle obsesses about whether Harry and Voldemort live or die in Deathly Hallows. (Of course Voldemort dies, silly, it’s that kind of book. Harry, on the other hand, isn’t a sure bet either way, though he’ll probably pull through, merely “greviously injured.”)
Immediately after guaranteeing that they’ll have stock on Deathly Hallows by giving a groveling, French-style apology to Ms. Rowling, the British supermarket chain Asda has announced that they’ll be selling it for £5 – roughly $10, and solidly below their own cost.
The Huffington Post apparently thinks that reviewing a book before the on-sale date is a hanging offense. Now, I’m happy to beat up on the New York Times as much as anyone – maybe even more so – but the job of a newspaper is to seek out news stories and report on them, which is exactly what they’ve done here.
The Bookseller reports on Bloomsbury’s attempts to cap Deathly Hallows returns in the UK by holding reprints until Wednesday.
The Scotsman reports on a hotel where you can get “Mrs. Weasley’s breakfast” tomorrow. (Again, that sounds like a euphemism for something I don’t waant to know about. "Darling, can you come over here? The dog’s got into Mrs. Weasley’s breakfast again, and I need a hand cleaning up.")
Publishing News is already looking past Potter to Christmas.
The Financial Times wants to know who, exactly, is making how much money on Potter. (It’s not the bookstores, as we all know by now.)
Despite so-so advance buzz and a lack of screening for reviewers, 20th Century-Fox seems to believe in the Fantastic Four franchise. As reported in the Los Angeles Times on Wednesday, they are already looking to spinoff the Silver Surfer into his own film.
