LONDON - NOVEMBER 4: (L to R) Rupert Grint (Ron Weasley), author J.K. Rowling, Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) and Emma Watson (Hermione Granger) attend the world film premiere of "Harry Potter and The Philosopher's Stone" at the Odeon Leicester Square cinema in London on November 4, 2001. The film is titled "Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone" for it's U.S. release. Photo / Getty Images
LONDON - NOVEMBER 4: (L to R) Rupert Grint (Ron Weasley), author J.K. Rowling, Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) and Emma Watson (Hermione Granger) attend the world film premiere of "Harry Potter and The Philosopher's Stone" at the Odeon Leicester Square cinema in London on November 4, 2001. The film is titled "Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone" for it's U.S. release. Photo / Getty Images
OPINION
If it was another instalment in JK Rowling’s world-conquering book series, it might be entitled Harry Potter and the Ugly Fallout. What began as a magical collaboration between the mega-successful author and the young actors who shot to stardom when they landed lead roles in the wizarding movie franchise has, over the years, turned increasingly nasty, as Rowling and the actors have publicly disagreed on hot-button topics such as trans rights.
The relationship started out with smiles and gushing words. Although Rowling had been nervous about Hollywood not doing her books justice, she was immediately on board with the casting choices: Daniel Radcliffe as her hero Harry, Rupert Grint as sidekick Ron, and Emma Watson as know-it-all Hermione.
“When Jo [Rowling] saw Dan, she said, ‘That’s how I always imagined Harry would look like’,” recalled Chris Columbus, who directed the first two movies in the series. Rowling herself said that she found watching Radcliffe’s audition tape “incredibly moving” – that it was like “watching my son on screen”.
So, how did this seemingly happy relationship fall to pieces? It was an all-consuming experience for these teenage actors, who were suddenly thrust into the limelight and with very little prior experience – and they’ve since looked back on their early work with some degree of embarrassment. “I don’t think what I was doing in the first two films could really be called acting,” Radcliffe has admitted, while Grint has commented: “I don’t think I took it that seriously. I just read my lines and had fun.”
That’s understandable given their age at the time (and pretty evident when you watch those performances), but does their dismissal run the risk of sounding ungrateful towards the writer who made their successful careers possible? Perhaps that eagerness to distance themselves from their early acting choices meant they were also all too ready to drop Rowling when she became a problem for them.
It’s fair to say that the Harry Potter experience wasn’t wholly positive either for the actors. Radcliffe has spoken openly about how the pressures of stardom exacerbated his problems with alcohol. “A lot of drinking that happened towards the end of Potter, and for a little bit after it finished, it was panic, a little bit not knowing what to do next – not being comfortable enough in who I was to remain sober,” he has said. Meanwhile, Watson has talked about the press sexualising her as a young teenager (The Sun did a countdown to her 16th birthday), or paparazzi trying to get up-skirt photographs when she turned 18.
There were sometimes tensions between the cast, too, as they worked long hours together. Radcliffe remembered that he and Watson “used to argue about everything: religion, politics… I remember one of the big arguments we had on the fourth film, we didn’t speak to each other for a couple of days”.
But it’s striking that there are no major reports of disagreements between Rowling and her cast from all those years of filming (the first film came out in 2001 and the final one in 2011). Instead, their bond and mutual respect seemed as healthy as ever. In 2007, Watson even surprised Rowling by presenting her with a Pride of Britain Award. It’s a pretty extraordinary video to watch now. Rowling is reduced to tears by the sight of her, and they hug warmly. “You really, really deserve it,” Watson coos. “Oh, Emma!” replies Rowling.
Today, however, it’s unlikely you would even find the two of them in the same room.
So, what changed? All three of the Potter stars have worked hard to reinvent themselves since the films ended and it’s evident they all want to be taken seriously. In Radcliffe’s case, that meant accepting challenging stage roles (he has just received his first Tony award nomination for the Stephen Sondheim musical Merrily We Roll Along on Broadway) and some weird movie projects, including a surreal comedy, Swiss Army Man, in which he plays a flatulent corpse.
Watson attended the prestigious Ivy League Brown University, in the US, and, alongside her acting work, became a respected feminist campaigner. She was appointed a UK Women Goodwill Ambassador in 2014 and helped launch the HeForShe movement. She was also a founding member of the anti-sexual harassment Time’s Up UK campaign and donated £1 million ($2.09m) to the Justice and Equality Fund in 2018.
Daniel Radcliffe (left), JK Rowling, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint attend a Harry Potter film premiere in London in 2011. Photo / Getty Images
The disagreements began in earnest in June 2020, when Rowling tweeted an opinion piece that referred to “people who menstruate”. The author wrote: “‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”
She followed that up with another tweet: “If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth.”
Rowling then explained why she had shared her concerns about “trans activism” in a raw blog post on her personal website. It covered everything from worries about female healthcare and education to the laws around transitioning, freedom of speech, and, finally, her own experience of domestic violence. It was a piece that packed a punch, explaining how emotive this topic was for Rowling.
‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?
Opinion: Creating a more equal post-COVID-19 world for people who menstruate https://t.co/cVpZxG7gaA
Radcliffe, meanwhile, expressed his views in a statement published by The Trevor Project, a suicide prevention charity for LGBTQ+ young people in 2020. “While Jo is unquestionably responsible for the course my life has taken … I feel compelled to say something at this moment… Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional healthcare associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.”
He added: “To all the people who now feel that their experience of the books has been tarnished or diminished, I am deeply sorry for the pain these comments have caused you.”
Watson was quick to weigh in, too. She took to Twitter to say: “Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned or told they aren’t who they say they are. I want my trans followers to know that I and so many other people around the world see you, respect you, and love you for who you are.”
It’s worth considering that societal attitudes to sexuality and gender have changed dramatically in the past few decades (and in the past few years, even), and that there are more pressures now on young actors to align with the prevailing orthodoxy for their generation – or face being “cancelled”. There really isn’t much room for doubt or nuance, at least not in public discourse.
JK Rowling faced criticism after she went public with her views on protecting women’s rights. Photo / AP
Conversely, Rowling was considered daring for belatedly revealing that the beloved Hogwarts headmaster Albus Dumbledore was gay. That has become part of the more recent spin-off film series, Fantastic Beasts, but was likely too controversial to include in the original books.
Hence, it’s heartbreaking to see how bitter this divide has become. Rowling continued to fight her corner, such as reacting to a 2021 report saying that Police Scotland would record rapes by attackers with male genitalia as being committed by women, if those offenders identified as female, with the tweet: “War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. The Penised Individual Who Raped You Is a Woman.”
Radcliffe doubled down on his Trevor Project statement, explaining in a 2022 interview why he had made it: “I’ve met so many queer and trans kids and young people who had a huge amount of identification with Potter. And so seeing them hurt on that day I was like, I wanted them to know that not everybody in the franchise felt that way. And that was really important.” He claimed that he couldn’t look at himself in the mirror otherwise, but – presumably referring to Rowling – added, “it’s not mine to guess what’s going on in someone else’s head”.
That same year Watson ruffled feathers at the Baftas. Presenting an award, she quipped, “I’m here for all of the witches”, which many interpreted as voicing support for trans women, as well as getting in a dig at Rowling.
Grint, however, showed some loyalty in his “What I’ve Learnt” piece for The Times in 2022. “I liken JK Rowling to an auntie,” he wrote. “I don’t necessarily agree with everything my auntie says, but she’s still my auntie. It’s a tricky one.”
The voices supporting Rowling were conspicuous by their absence. Few others from the Harry Potter film world came to Rowling’s defence, bar Ralph Fiennes, who played Voldemort. “The verbal abuse directed at her is disgusting, it’s appalling,” he said. “I can understand a viewpoint that might be angry at what she says about women. But it’s not some obscene, uber-right-wing fascist. It’s just a woman saying ‘I’m a woman and I feel I’m a woman and I want to be able to say that I’m a woman’.”
Sadly, it seems no amount of wand-waving can heal this rift – even though new information is continually coming to light in the trans debate. Following the April publication of the seismic final report of Cass Review, one X user, Adam Harris, tweeted Rowling, saying: “Just waiting for Dan and Emma to give you a very public apology ... safe in the knowledge that you will forgive them...” Rowling responded: “Not safe, I’m afraid. Celebs who cosied up to a movement intent on eroding women’s hard-won rights and who used their platforms to cheer on the transitioning of minors can save their apologies for traumatised detransitioners and vulnerable women reliant on single sex spaces.”
In any case, none of the Potter actors have directly addressed the findings of the Cass Review, let alone said sorry to Rowling about some of her (it now appears) legitimate concerns. But as she has been backed into this militant stance, perhaps it’s too late for her to find a middle ground as well.
Not safe, I'm afraid. Celebs who cosied up to a movement intent on eroding women's hard-won rights and who used their platforms to cheer on the transitioning of minors can save their apologies for traumatised detransitioners and vulnerable women reliant on single sex spaces.
In another interview this week with The Atlantic, Radcliffe also spoke of their relationship with real finality. He reiterated that his Trevor Project statement was necessary: “I wanted to try and help people that had been negatively affected by the comments. And to say that if those are Jo’s views, then they are not the views of everybody associated with the Potter franchise.”
Moreover, he drew a connection between the Potter world and the queer community, adding: “A lot of people found some solace in those books and films who were dealing with feeling closeted or rejected by their family or living with a secret.” Radcliffe also acknowledged that “nothing in my life would have happened” without Rowling’s creation, but added: “That doesn’t mean that you owe the things you truly believe to someone else for your entire life.”
Let Women Speak activist Kellie-Jay Keen blasted Radcliffe for his comments, calling them “revolting, obnoxious and ungrateful” on GB News. She condemned “his silence when [Rowling] was being horrifically targeted, when she received death threats. Not once did he stand up and say. ‘Not in my name. I may not agree with the woman, but none of this is in my name.’”
In the interview with The Atlantic, Radcliffe also revealed that he hadn’t been in contact with Rowling for years – and it doesn’t sound like that’s going to change. “It makes me really sad, ultimately, because I do look at the person that I met, the times that we met, and the books that she wrote, and the world that she created, and all of that is to me so deeply empathic.”
The voices supporting JK Rowling have been conspicuous by their absence and few from the Harry Potter film world have came to her defence. Photo / Getty Images
That’s really the enduring puzzle here. For such an inclusive, morally upstanding work, a film series made with unusual creative harmony, and a group of – as far as we can tell – kind-hearted people, it’s tragic that it’s now defined by this acrimony.
Dumbledore famously counselled his pupils at Hogwarts to make the crucial choice between what is right and what is easy. Cooling down this inferno of a debate and rebuilding the Potter family would not be easy, but at least making some attempt would be a mature, humble and healing act by all involved. It’s surely the right thing to do.
