Rowling Reconsidered: Part 1

[angua9]

J.K. Rowling ‏@jk_rowling 10h ago
All I've done so far this week is change three characters' genders and I still don't know whether their current genitalia are permanent.
This is a post I've been meaning to write for a little while and J.K. Rowling's tweet today is too good of a lead-in to miss. I'm using my Lockhart icon not to indicate that I'm

Comments

[tartanboxers]

I don't know how helpful this comment is going to be, because I can only offer my own perspective as (now) an author. All writers have a very personal process, and I can guarantee you mine differs from JKR's. As evidenced by that complicated plot chart we have from her notes, she actually plots a book before she writes it, where I do not. OTOH, she's on record as having Harry walk fully formed into her head, which is closer to my experience, where the characters tell me what they want and not the other way around.

So I write romance novels now, which--I keep hearing, but maybe romance authors just like telling themselves this--is a feminist expression, because romance authors are mainly women, and we're telling mainly women's stories via our heroines. But here's the thing. When I sit down to write a story, I don't explicitly tell myself I'm setting out to write something expressly feminist. As I stated above, the characters are in charge and I have to follow what they want to do, or they take their toys and go home.

While I would call myself a feminist, I'm just here to tell a story, and I think that's the case for many authors. If we wanted to write feminist tracts, we'd follow in the footsteps of Mary Wollstonecraft and Gloria Steinem.

[angua9]

Oh, I strongly agree. If it's a choice between her telling the stories that come to her (with male protagonists) or not telling stories at all, please, Jo, tell the stories!

I also agree romance novels are a feminist expression, and THEY (except for male/male stories) have female protagonists and always have. :)