Blinkin ell JB, you sure are angry about all this. I reserve mine for people that fuck up other people's lives; liars, murderers or politicians.

I read that American plaintiff bollox, and the stories are just completely different, its a joke. So muggles is a word they both made up. Should Terry Brooks be sued by the estate of Tolkein, and if so, then so should a hell of a lot of writers. Should Gaimen and Pratchett sue you for writing a story about a reluctant teenage antichrist?

Can you not accept it may be coincidence, and that in fact, the stories are different? Neil Gaimen may not want to write stories like JK does, so although they have similar characters, they are not plaigerism?

If not, fair enough mate, but don't get angry, get even.



<Added>

Yeah okay mate, she's an evil bitch who just copies Neil Gaimen and sues everyone who tries to disagree or muddy her name.

God, how evil, I wish they'd stop her from writing now.

Not only is she poisoning our kids with bad writing and success, she is a mad business tycoon, ruthless enough to rival Trump, Gates and Sugar all rolled into one.

I shall burn my Harry Potter books forthwith.

I'm not angry, just informed. If there was some hint of influence, of homage, I would feel differently. But this is out and out copying, in my opinion. Good luck to her. Personally, I think she must be a pretty vile woman. Talentless theives generally are.

Sure, comparisons can be drawn between TA and Good Omens, though I thought Good Omens skimmed the surface of a much bigger idea (somewhat badly, in my opinion - good book, wasted theme), and TA is firmly based in actual Eschatological and Christian myth. Good Omens is pretty localised. TA is on a world stage. It may not be better or worse

Anyway, there are so many other fantasy works dealing with Antichrist, dating back to God knows when, that I don't see it as the same thing. Should nobody write about giants or fairies or ghosts...or zombies? Gaiman didn't write the bible or the Divine Comedy. He didn't make the Omen films. It really isn't the same thing, and I respectfully resent that implication.

Fine. You like Potter. The evidence of her plagiarism is pretty much stacked against the 'coincidence' claim. No smoke without fire, and all that mate, and there is a whole inferno out there.

Yep. Plagiarism and stealing make me slightly sick. That someone's imagination can actually be raped and turned into big Hollywood bucks, filtering endlessly into the bank account of someone who simply doesn't derserve it. Call me moral.

JB








<Added>

Dav - I'm a writer. The issue affects and concerns me directly, because I am in the industry. I am not a politician.

<Added>

In closing, all I wanted to do was illustrate why I'm adverse to the HP sensation, on a personal level. I feel I have raised some valid points, and would never level the same kind of remarks at anyone without being able to back it up. I have done that.

Waxy, you must have miles of rope lying around your pad. Your neck must be covered in nasty bruises.

Thanks for using my argument against me and pretending I’m in the wrong.

You're saying it's okay for you to do exactly what you say she shouldn’t, so get a grip I would.

No. That isn't what I'm saying and you know it.

My writing deals with a similar myth. Rowling has used the same characters, the same names, the same school colours and emblems. How you're turning a discussion about HP into an outright accusation of my own plagiarism is pretty low Dav.

You defended Rowling, fine. You said we were bitter because we didn't like it. So what you're really saying is that only you're opinion is right? That is anyone raises facts to support their opinion they are wrong? Should I lie? Should I agree with you just to get along? That is not adult debate, and I was debating. I defended my opinion, that's all. If you want to get personal, please do it by yourself.

JB

Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!


;-) Mike

Well, you try to have a mature discussion with someone, presenting compelling facts to support your view, and you basically get someone sticking their tongue out and stamping their foot.

Mind you, can't expect much better from grown ups who think a badly written children's book is the best thing since sliced bread.

Milk and cookies anyone?

JB

Oo very cuttin Waxy, coz you are just so mature, and always right.

You talk about stamping your foot, the man who lost it and wrote such despicable crap in the London bomb thread. You ought to check yourself mate.

Shame you don't get the "compelling facts" for things that actually matter, because beleive me, whether you and JK Rowling are ripping off Neil Gaimen is really very irrelevent.

Like yourself, you mean.

<Added>

'Get a grip' yeah, 'Check yourself' yeah.

Don't ever presume to tell me what the fuck to think or express, thanks.

Careful you too. You know the thread will get moved to the lounge and you'll be getting slapped wrists off the powers that be.....

<Added>

That should be 'you two'

You two remind of the history professors on Newman and Baddiel. They'd start off sensibly discussing something like the affects of the Renaissance on Tuscany village life, but very soon get to insulting each other in a very schoolboy manner, e.g. 'Have you seen those great white billowing sails on the mighty clipper ships?" "I have seen such a thing." "Well, that's your mum's pants, that is!"

Oh my God! I'm now crying with laughter!!!

<Added>

Terry, that is just fantastic! I remember watching History Today with my brother - we used to love it. He still has the video too with them on the cover.

Cath,

I think they used to improvise sometimes. There's one where Newman says something like, "I saw this little cracked saucer, with a horrible blue flower design on it, dirty and forgotten down a must old alleway - that's your satellite dish, that is!" and Baddiel had a hard time not laughing. If I recall, they always used to end very civily, with Baddiel saying something like, "Well, I'd like to thank professer Perkins for a most illuminating discussion on the plight of the Cathars under the Inquisition."

I don't find much amusing about Davy's continual insults and intractable stances. If you look at any comments made, you will see that the insults are always initiated by him, usually during some discussion where he has deliberately set out to disagree with me, despite fact.

He does this because he is clearly insecure, and terribly jealous. I also suspect he has a very small penis, and this would account for his ongoing and half-cocked political rants at people. He tells me that I always think I'm right, which is laughable considering all the apologising I do to people when I'm not. I am here to learn, not to be intellectually bullied by someone with an increasingly foul mouth and (ahem) short fuse, who amounts to little more than a closet fascist. That's what you are when you don't allow someone to have an opinion.

You're not paranoid Dav. Everybody does hate you.

JB

JB,

I'm sorry but I wasn't making fun of you, just trying to lighten the situation for the rest of us.

Honestly, the best thing you can do is ignore Dav. We're all adults here and have our views on the good sides of both of you. You don't need to defend yourself, really. There are aspects to Dav's attitude that I admire, others not so. But it's irrelevant to the respect I have for you and your honesty. Just let it go.

Terry

Goddamn it you worked me out James. My entire life and everything I believe centers around my bitterness in having such an amazingly small penis.

Now that is like the Baddiel thing!

Seriously though, why don't you read through some of your own comments, and I think you'll find we're not a million miles from each other.

And after reading all that, well, do you think I would be paranoid about being hated?

Well, thanks people, you all cheered me up no end there.

Peas Out.





<Added>

Soz, I see that makes no sense. Do you think I would care about being hated? That's what I meant.