OT The Book, was: Once more - with questions. part 2.

[snow15145]

Snow previous:

> I'm torn between commenting on the totally late reply or the 
> congratulations to the acknowledgements to Barry Arrowsmith for his 
> insight to The End of Harry Potter (U.S. edition, March 2007). 
> Congrats Kneasy! ... Name in lights!
>

Kneasy:

Um.
Thank you.
It was a surprise to me, too.
Or will be; SFAIK the 2nd ed. hasn't been released here in the UK yet.
Langford is a friend of a friend, so I traded on that in contacting 
him
and noting that there were lots more ideas and theories available
from the Potterhead fanatics on the boards and did he want 
suggestions? And by the way, here's one: Ravenclaw's wand.
To-ing and fro-ing of emails, but unfortunately he couldn't. 
Gollancz wanted the same page count and there was no space to 
expand, though he did like the idea I'd thrown in and would squeeze 
it in as a footnote.

I hope he's included my caveat that the idea that it was the wand in
Olivanders window came from someone else; hate it to be thought 
that I'd claim another fan's brainwaves as my own.


Snow:

I'm shocked you didn't even know your were given credit, not just any 
credit but the lead credit of the Acknowledgements and Thanks section 
at the back end of the book. I must enlighten you of what was written:

"When I write a book, I need a good many people to get behind and 
shove hard. Thanks are due to all the following:

Barry Arrowsmith, for the Ravenclaw-Tarot-Wand theory and other 
interesting comments on this book's hardback edition." (The End Of 
Harry Potter? By David Langford)

The list continues on to include Rich Coad, Malcolm Edwards, Nick 
Lowe, Christopher Priest, Lizzy Priest, Mark Rodgers, J.K. Rowling 
(credit given before the author), Yvonne Rousseau, Gordon Smith, 
Martin Morse Wooster and W. Fredrick Zimmerman. 

The wand in the window was part of the scenario but no specifics as 
to who gave the actual idea appeared at the citation so I would say 
you were off the hook as to whether or not you attempted to take 
credit for that particular idea within the theory. In fact, I'm 
rather curious what other ideas you gave him after reading his first 
hard back edition, since he doesn't specify directly. (Hell, you 
might be asking yourself the same question once you read this edition)

Langford was an interesting read, unlike the majority of 
the `unauthorized' guild. There were a few delicious tidbits that I 
hadn't thought of which brought the old mind back to churning out new 
possibilities. I hadn't read Langford's first copy but in this one he 
questions whether Voldy is an animagus of the snake in the 
ministry...and I thought I scoped everything. 

It was very cool to see your name in the book...although I always 
thought, like many, that you would have broke down and wrote one 
yourself. (I remember you being encouraged to do so some time ago) 

Congrats again,

Snow