Rowling entered her hardcore talking-back era, growing wittier by the week as she sharpened her teeth on her detractors, and my admiration went off the scale. Every time she delivers the best comeback (‘Whenever somebody burns a Potter book the royalties vanish from my bank account – and if the book’s signed, one of my teeth falls out’) I think she can’t get any better – and then she does.
It’s interesting that Fry talks as though Rowling has experienced some sort of mind-warping trauma for simply adopting the practice of not caring what others – especially strangers – think of one, which is a by-product of being secure in one’s own sense of self. This has, of course, been recognised as a reliable way of achieving serenity, from the ancient Stoics to the recent Let Them Theory – but if a woman can achieve this kind of emotional security, it panics a certain sort of insecure man immensely. Thus, ‘a hard man’ is a term of admiration, whereas ‘a hard woman’ is lacking something, that certain softness, that sugar and spice and all things nice, that makes a woman a woman. Or rather, that renders a woman a castrated #BeKind Transmaid.
I’d wager that all of J.K.R.’s famous critics envy her money – no one is as greedy as the rich – but even more than that, as they crouch atop their relatively modest fortunes like resentful dung beetles, they envy her the ease, the generosity and yes, the nobility which has seen her go from billionaire to a mere multi-millionaire, like them. One gets the impression that whereas J.K.R. has the psychological bandwidth – which probably comes from real confidence in her own creativity – to dispense with vast amounts of cash, there is a bottomless pit of neediness inside her critics which leads them to grab at, say, advertising campaigns the way they do.
Source: The real reason J.K. Rowling’s critics hate her | The Spectator
JK Rowling is a legend a great comedian as well as author and we are lucky …Fry can go fry what a dickwad