Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(   Harry Potter author donates $100,000 in fan's memory   ( divider line
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

5255 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Dec 2002 at 4:11 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

48 Comments     (+0 »)
2002-12-29 02:04:27 PM  
Class. Act.

2002-12-29 04:13:43 PM  
still no cure...
2002-12-29 04:17:22 PM  
It's a bit of old news. Who conjured this one up?
2002-12-29 04:17:54 PM  
isn't that gweat? :)
2002-12-29 04:17:59 PM  
Agreed, 3horn, agreed.

Sad but definately deserving of the tag
2002-12-29 04:18:03 PM  
Class act all the way.
2002-12-29 04:19:24 PM much as i hate the whole Harry Potter phenomenon I can now be happy that at least the person perpetuating this whole thing has a heart.
2002-12-29 04:19:32 PM  
I'll never say anything bad about Harry Potter again. Not even the crappy movies. After this.
2002-12-29 04:21:53 PM  
Wow, I guess I can be one of the first to ask...WTF? She donated 100k to the kid's memorial fund. Touching, but it doesn't detail what the fund is for. Does it donate to research for a cure? Does it donate to other kids with the ailment? Just a bit more info would have been appropriate, instead we get a bunch of smarmy "ooh yer a griffindork"
2002-12-29 04:24:02 PM  
GoodyearPimp: Does it matter?
2002-12-29 04:26:46 PM  
Does what matter? The fact that she gave away 100k to an unknown cause? Yeh, it matters to people that aren't caught up in waiting for the next book or anyone that things donated money should go to a worthy cause.
2002-12-29 04:30:57 PM  
"The Catie Hoch Foundation has been created for two reasons. The first is to help the medical community research and hopefully find a cure for neuroblastoma. This devastating disease is a rare and aggressive pediatric cancer. The second is to allow families to enjoy the good days during treatment."
2002-12-29 04:31:52 PM  
I'm not a fan of Harry Potter, but that was cool.
2002-12-29 04:34:07 PM  
And a big "FARK YOU" to everyone who keeps pushing the myth that J.K.Rowling is only writing these books to push satanism and witchcraft on children.

Definately a class act.
2002-12-29 04:34:57 PM  
sad very sad
2002-12-29 04:36:51 PM  
I had ranted railed and raved against the whole Harry Potter phenom, based on it made me ill how many apparently intelligent adults were reading it on the Tube and the bus everywhere, yet general literacy (like, reading Literature other than Fiction) is still a rarity. A friend cornered me once and asked me bluntly if I'd read them myself (given that I pontificate and preach and prate about what great literature is). I took the challenge and read them all in a day, and was grudgingly forced to admit they're actually not bad. And grudgingly I admitted that if it makes more children read, and get into a habit of reading, I suppose it's a good thing.
J.K Rowling, in many ways, seems a good person as much as a passable writer. Single mother, independant, and unphased by the sudden catapulting to fame. It's heartening to see philanthropy excercised, but even more so when it's done at such a person level (as she rang the poor child).
2002-12-29 04:37:48 PM  
I think it's incredible that she called the little girl on the phone and read her excerpts from the fourth book before it was released, especially when it was to be a massive secret. Really classy, I'm rather impressed.
2002-12-29 04:39:08 PM  
Yes, it does matter what the fund goes into. I am not satisfied with the "She threw money at something that relates to a girl who tragically died! Love her, for she is nice!" With famous rich people, it's hard to tell if they are giving money for a charity because they want to, or just so people will know they give money to charities.

Honestly, I could care less about the money. To me, the important thing is that she actually donated time to the girl, rather then money. And she did. It's all very sweet and moving.. I am literally tripping over myself, since I have long held a resentment for her books.

It seems she really is a good spirited, child-loving woman, and for that, I do salute her. I'll even refrain from saying anything negative about her books. Heck, I always thought they are good for children.

But a jaded part of me, a part that has heard way too many stories of celebrities showing their "kind nature" by hugging a wounded puppy, will always wonder "Did she do it because she wanted to, or so people would know that she did?"
2002-12-29 04:41:59 PM  
Thanks, The_entropy_kid.
2002-12-29 04:43:21 PM  

Google is your friend. Learn to use it. Info on the fund can be found here.
2002-12-29 04:44:57 PM  
Lets see.

Author = Millions
Millions - 100000 = Millions


No. But nice work.
2002-12-29 04:45:09 PM  
Having a 9 month old child... I am terrified of him getting any disease. Especially a fatal one. To hear that people out there really do care about children in this time of hyper-capitalism and guerrilla marketing, it really is refreshing. From what I hear, the author of the book was very poor when she got the idea of writing Harry Potter. Good for her!

Ok - now I can go back to being a necessary bastard again.

2002-12-29 04:47:47 PM  
She'd be a hero if she gave the majority of her money to charity and didn't do it in front of cameras. What she did here was nice, but it seems like a publicity stunt with a happy/sappy bonus.

just my 2 cents...
2002-12-29 04:48:52 PM  
She donated money to a "Find the Cure for Cancer" fund as a publicity stunt?! OH NO THAT'S TERRIBLE! Give her the money back right away and hate her for the publicity stunt!

Seriously, on a subject like this, who cares if it's for publicity or not?! Obviously this isn't one, but just the fact alone that it's going to a cure for cancer is enough.
2002-12-29 04:48:53 PM  
A rare Greedless thing from a author who takes so much shiat from everyone...nice, nice work.
2002-12-29 04:52:01 PM  
Now that I have read Epistax's post, what's with you? That's still more than what most people in the world will EVER have in their lifetime. Just because it's not everything she had doesn't mean she doesn't deserve a hero tag. Bah. Just. Bah.
2002-12-29 04:52:55 PM  
Ms. Rowling, like Harry Potter, rocks.
2002-12-29 04:54:00 PM  
"but just the fact alone that it's going to a cure for cancer is enough."

Assuming that the researchers are looking for a cure (which doesn't even seem like a possibility, given that cancer is not a viral or bacterial 'infection', nor is it a 'condition'). In other words, people are pouring money into research and expecting a cure that really cannot be. Would be better spent on controllable stuff -- you know, like making sure all the aging baby boomers have full heads of hair and rock hard erections. (kidding) I'm in favor of putting the money toward letting the kids have some fun in the remainder of their lives, however.
2002-12-29 05:02:13 PM

Happy Funtime HP Slash.
2002-12-29 05:03:57 PM  
link bad.

make me cry.
2002-12-29 05:09:23 PM  
Leave it to farkers to always find a reason to shiat on a celebrity for being kind.

Just because you're famous doesn't mean your a selfish, greedy Nazi loving jerkoff. She gave $10,000 more than any of us did.

Just my 2 cents.
2002-12-29 05:13:06 PM  
Actually, it is possible to find some cure for cancer (I think), but I doubt it can be found by focusing on curing cancer.

Seems to me like it would be a byproduct of some other new technology, like tiny nanobots that can target the cancer cells, or whatnot. But no money that goes into these funds would ever find their way into the hands of the guy researching tiny nanobots.

Most of the best medicines and inventions today were found by accident or just "general research", which is something America doesn't do a lot of.

But like I said, just a bit too jaded over the whole "Rich person gives money to a sentimental cause" thing to say she's a hero. I have almost no money, and I gave a buck to a fund to held abused children. Am I a hero?

The buck will buy a soda for an abused child to help him/her when she is thirsty. The 100,000 will do jack squat in the "Cure for Cancer" industry, which already has billions in it.

Like I said, she deserves praise for what she did for the girl (reading to her over the phone), not how much she paid to her fund after the girl died. She has a good heart.
2002-12-29 05:15:59 PM  
To "help" abused children, I mean. I know someone will point it out.

Also, no, I can't really tell which side of this argument I am on either. Kinda makes it hard to flame me, doesn't it? I am sure you'll find a way.
2002-12-29 05:39:44 PM  
Did the fan die from a lightning strike to the forehead?

I'm sorry.
2002-12-29 05:46:42 PM  
Christ, some of you are some jaded cynical turds. OK, so if she gives 350k is she a hero? how about half her earnings? Is she a "hero" in your eyes then?

It's not the money, it's the thought.
2002-12-29 06:17:48 PM  
3horn summed it all up in the thread's initial comment.
2002-12-29 06:27:14 PM  
She put this child's happiness over the 'secrecy' on the 4th book, which probably was required in her book contract. Very cool.

She then gave a sizeable chunk of money to the deceased's memorial fund. Also way cool. It doesn't matter if you think the cause is hopeless, or the cure can't be found, there's 100k more going towards it than there was before, and she (Rowlings) put it there. Very classy.

But to all those who are talking crap, you cannot deny this one thing... when it was revealed the child couldn't use her computer, Rowling called and READ EXCERPTS TO HER OVER THE PHONE. You cannot even begin to imagine what a joy that was to a terminally ill child who needed every bit of happiness that could be found. That right there makes the 'Hero' tag well deserved. Say what you want, how you want, but that brief moment of joy in that child's life was absolutely priceless.
2002-12-29 06:34:09 PM  
3Horn had it right.

The rampant cynicism in this trhead is sickening, and I am a cynic by nature. Bravo to J. K. Rowling for showing she is as human as her books make me think she is, and my sympathies to the parents of this poor little girl.

I should be unsurprised though, as the general demographic of Fark would probably show a readership base somewhat younger than myself (30) and likely single with no kids. When you're a parent, this sort of thing hits home a bit more.
2002-12-29 07:02:54 PM  
wow, as much as she hates americans, I would have bet money that she would only give money if a brit kid had died.
2002-12-29 07:53:11 PM  
I suppose if Hitler or Saddam donated $100,000 to their fan's memory, ya'll be singin' his praises too.

Sad . . .
2002-12-29 08:04:12 PM  
Child: "Could you read me part of the fourth book"

JK Rowling: "No, it's secret. I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill y... well sure I can!"
2002-12-29 08:42:14 PM  
Okay, she's:

(1) filthy rich;
(2) pretty;
(3) smart; and
(4) has a good heart

Other than that, what has she got going for her?
2002-12-29 08:55:47 PM  
Wow, she tosses money around. Hooray. Congrats for the memorial, the books still suck ass.
2002-12-29 08:58:19 PM  
Harry Potter Brightens kids Lives ;-)
2002-12-29 09:39:26 PM  
Klippoklondike You're an idiot. Publicity Stunt? Yes, because nobody's ever heard of this "Harry Potter" character. It's the thought that counts. I'm not saying that she's a hero, but at least she's made an effort. And TheRapy, I disagree. These are intelligent people who are handling the whole 'cure for cancer' fund, and I'm sure they're investing in what needs to be invested in. They're not trying to make money, or buy a new widescreen TV for the cancer research lab in Norwich - They actually care, and they have some University degrees that are pretty hard to come by. And completely unrelated shiny cars, and big houses.

As for the books, I must agree that they are excellently writtne, but, right, what would I know, I just spelt 'written' incorrectly. The Movies were indeed dire. Still, I recommend you read the books, whether they're aimed at children or not. Try to be open minded though, which may be difficult, but will probably stop you trying to see how Rowling ripped off "The Lord of the Rings".
2002-12-29 10:12:37 PM  
I realize this is Fark, and Farkers are a law unto themselves, but sheesh, some of you are being beyond cold. Celebs are just as capable of Doing Good Things as the next person, and Rowling did an Especially Good Thing in givng her time and attention to that poor child.

She rocks, both as a writer and a human being.
2002-12-29 11:28:43 PM  

This woman is a demonstrably better person than anyone on this board (unless I missed one of your $100,000 charitable donations).

The fact that 100k is only a tiny fraction of her wealth is immaterial, unless you equate a gift's value to the amount it hurts the giver.

2002-12-30 11:11:31 AM  
I suppose if Hitler or Saddam donated $100,000 to their fan's memory, ya'll be singin' his praises too.

*cough* Godwin *cough*

Last one off the thread turn out the lights...

Displayed 48 of 48 comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.