J.K. Rowling Signs deal to write an Adult Novel

Harry Potter author JK Rowling is obviously financially stable, and if she doesn’t want to, she never has to write another book as long as she lives. Of course the fans would be dying for her to continue in the Potterverse, but she has repeatedly made it clear that wasn’t going to happen.

But that doesn’t mean she isn’t going to write another book. In fact, she actually IS returning to writing and thanks to publisher Little, Brown (same publisher that brought you Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight novels) Rowling is expected to write her first Non-Potter book. This time it will be for grown-ups!

That’s right. Despite the rabid fanbase just begging for more Potter, Rowling will be writing a new book that will be targeted at adult readers. This makes sense for Rowling as that very same rabid fanbase will have aged a minimum of 14 years since the Harry Potter novels were first published. It is fair to say that most of them are adults now.

Also, if you read the books, you can see that her writing style does mature alongside the characters, just as the storyline matured to a much darker and more serious tone.

No word as to the context of the new book, though Rowling assures us it will be very different from her Harry Potter works. Of course that vague indication not only confirms its not a Harry Potter related product, but also spawns wild speculation as to what it might be.

What kind of (non-Potter) stories would you like to see J.K. Rowling take on?

[Via | Picture Source: Beacon Radio (CC)]


21 Responses to J.K. Rowling Signs deal to write an Adult Novel

  1. Rant time!

    Everywhere I see this story, they keep repeating "It's not going to be for kids!" and "This one's for adults!" If Harry Potter is "for kids," then so is just about everything Charles Dickens wrote. Of course, the same people tend to make the same mistake about Narnia and sometimes even The Lord of the Rings (usually by people who have only seen the movies, I bet).

    The hallmark of "literary fiction" (the genre so good they named it twice!) snobs is dismissing anything that feels sensational by any means possible. Since Harry Potter starts out as a 10-year-old, it's "obviously" for little kids; and in this country, the litfic snobs are in charge of most of the publishing houses and large bookstores. The rule of thumb in the industry is that if you have a child character (someone under 18), your book is targeted at an age group two years younger. That's why you have Harry Potter in the "Independent Reader" section in your local bookstore; when it came out, the publishers decided it HAD to be just for eight-year-olds. They've never wanted to admit they were wrong, for the same reason that nearly every college professor-type who has written an opinion on the series has said it is complete trash, worth no attention, and would soon be forgotten.

    Jo Rowling probably finds that last part particularly funny every time she gets a new royalty check. ;)

  2. Dude, Harry Potter IS children's fiction. Have you even seen how simple the language use is? – 'tis why it's targeted at children, because that's the kind of language everyone can understand and enjoy. I reckon the guy who commented above me must be a Potterhead by his language choice and general disregard for the experts. (And so what? Everyone makes mistaKes once in their lives, and besides, the series gets better and better as it goes on – who could predict that?)

    • And how many words do most people use on a regular basis?

      And have you even read these books–as an adult? These books are for everyone, especially mythology geeks.

      Fun facts: Hogshead was a unit of measurement for alcohol. Centaurs are famous for raping women–wonder whatever happened to Umbridge?

  3. I'm a huge Harry Potter fan since I grew up with it, but I didn't and don't, want any more Potter books. She has done all she could. I see people whining for a new book about the founders, and about the next generation, but that's ridiculous. She gave us an entire world, and left a lot open for our own imaginations to continue the Harry Potter series. We get to come up with that stuff on our own. It's ridiculous to drag out a series more than need be. All it would do is get her more money ( if it was even any good ) , and Jo doesn't seem to be the type of person who would do that.
    I'm quite excited to see what she comes up with now that HP is done. I'm looking forward to reading something new from her, as she's one of my favorite authors.
    I do wish she ( or the publishers, or ANYONE ) would give a bit more detail though! I want to know more about what this book is even about!
    I'll just have to impatiently wait I suppose :)

  4. Plus, you cannot POSSIBLY compare JK to Charles Dickens.
    Dickens was a wordsmith, he could could paint an immaculate masterpiece with the power of his words. His natural affinity for all things literature makes him one of the greatest writers of all time, and everything he has written, from the early days to the later, was nothing more than pure, magical genius.
    He was a God amongst writers, and one series could never compare to that.

  5. I'm sorry, but how the hell is Narnia not for children? Lewis wrote it for his goddaughter and has asides to the children, talking about adults, throughout the books. Harry Potter also started as children's literature. It ended up somewhat young adult, but regardless it's written for young people. So what? No Literary fanatic thinks that children's lit is a waste of time. It's a genre, not a criticism.

  6. Considering most Harry Potter fans can only read at an 8th grade level I think she might be missing her target audience. Its sort of disturbing how many adults are raving about young adult fiction. It says terrifying things about our education system.

    • Brian, that statement is not only a weak troll attack, but completely unfounded. Where do you get this assumption that the average reading level of a Harry Potter fan is grade 8? Out of thin air? Somewhere the sun doesn't shine perhaps? Thought so.

      And these adults are "raving" about young adult fiction because for once in a century we don't treat children's stories like they are nursery rhymes. YA books CAN appeal to adults, and kids/teens/and even those grade eight reading level kids can appreciate a more mature storyline.

  7. I get that from the fact that Harry Potter is a YA book. The people I know who are into Harry Potter are only very rarely avid readers. The people I know who read often tended to find the Harry Potter books simplistic. On the other hand the people I know who *do* like Harry Potter I've never really known to pick up a book and aren't exactly the brightest people I know. Personal observations. I'd say the exactly same thing of the twilight series of books.

    Its not if a YA book is treated as nursery rhymes, it's that a book that uses simplistic language and plot is finding success with many adults. Sure its speculation that they are attracted to it because they find more complex book difficult. I doubt many HP readers would admit that they have difficulty reading. They'd probably just say they don't like them. I suspect that the magic success of both Harry Potter and Twilight is the simplistic writing, and the mature themes that you're so quick to defend.

    • Apparently I was being generous with the HP grade levels. It starts at 5.1 and ends at 7.2. Rage if you want, but if children's books appeal to you it says something about your own reading level.

  8. *sigh* J.K. Rowling (or to be accurate, Joanne Rowling) submitted her book to publisher's AS a Children's book. @Brian's assessment that they are targeted for a Young Adult audience is probably correct – it's not an introductory reading level, it's definitely for kids who are old enough to have good comprehension skills.

    That she is a consummate storyteller with good writing skills doesn't change the fact that they are still targeted for a young audience. That people think her primary theme of death isn't for kids hasn't read a whole lot of early fairy tales, which were filled with all sorts of gory deaths and other "adult" (not porn, but not for kids ;) ) themes.

    Protagonists don't throw a book into a category – it's usually the level of language and voice of the narrator. "Something Wicked This Way Comes" has 13 year old protagonists, but it's not really considered a children's book. "Watership Down" has rabbits for characters, but that is most definitely an adult book. And kids enjoy reading will read anything thrown in front of them – my Mom had me reading Edgar Allan Poe short stories when I was 9 years old, because I'd shown an interest in "kid-appropriate" scary and mystery novels. After "The Murders in the Rue Morgue", the age-appropriate Encyclopedia Brown was utterly abandoned ;)

    I personally don't think there's anything wrong with adults reading well-written children's books. Give me a choice between some modern literary fiction that everyone is raving about but really kind of sucks and a re-read of, say "Mrs. Frisby and The Rats of NIMH", there's rarely any difficulty in choosing. And let's not forget – the global phenomenon of "Masquerade" was rooted in a picture book for children. (The publisher's idea, not Kit Williams', but still.)

    I think since kids are more demanding readers than adults (ever read to a kid who just keeps asking "Why?"), I think children's books sometimes have to be more complete and vivid in their worlds than more "literary" authors.

    I'll read almost anything by Roald Dahl (and he successfully wrote both children's and adult fiction). I still love Ellen Raskin's "The Westing Game", and I am always charmed by E.L. Konigsburg's "From the Mixed-up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler" (what kid hasn't dreamed of living in a museum after hours and scooping up all the change thrown into a fountain?) I enjoyed Suzanne Collins' "Hunger Games" series (though I do admit I only fully enjoyed the first book – the rest weren't as engaging to me for some reason). And let's not forget – Neil Gaiman's "Coraline" and "The Graveyard Book" are both considered Children's fiction. The latter won him a Newbery award (among others), which is specifically FOR that category.

    As for JKR? As noted above, she's a great story teller. I can think of several other writers who are technically better and her continuity isn't always the best. But when she kills off her characters, you really feel it. Not in a ASoIaF, I'm going to throw this book across the room manner, but you feel it. I don't know if I'll buy anything she has to write for adults – I'll probably check it out from the library first. I don't know if her tone is going to be good for adult books, since unlike authors like Gaiman or Dahl, she submerged herself only in one world for so long.

    If you want to spew venom about an author of young adult fiction branching into adult fiction? Save it for Stephenie Meyer. I grudgingly admit she's also a storyteller – her books wouldn't be successful if she wasn't because they are SO horribly written and her characters so devoid of anything young adults should aspire to it's not even funny. That she got a contract to write anything for adults is a travesty.

  9. Personally, I can't wait to read J.K. Rowling's new book, even if it's not HP related. In fact, I'm glad it's not. She shouldn't bow to the fans wishes if she doesn't want to because that just means that she won't be putting her heart into it.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.