Oprah Winfrey's next big literary surprise: J.K. Rowling [updated]
An interview with J. K. Rowling will broadcast on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" this Friday, it was announced Monday. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter books, is notoriously media-shy, but she met with Winfrey at a Scottish hotel for an interview.
It's Winfrey's second big literary news of her last broadcast season, after selecting Jonathan Franzen's "Freedom" as a book club pick, despite her troubled history with the author.
Winfrey and Rowling have something in common -- they're among only 14 women on the globe who are self-made billionaires, Forbes reported in June. Rival talk show hostess and home guru Martha Stewart had once made the list, but has fallen below the billion-dollar mark. There's no word of Rowling appearing on Stewart's show.
Although J. K. Rowling is media-shy, she is also media-savvy. The next film adaptation from her Harry Potter series -- "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1" -- is coming to theaters in November. With a new trailer and excitement building, now is certainly a smart time to have a sit-down with the media -- or, more specifically, with Winfrey.
Will Rowling write another Harry Potter book? According to the Associated Press, that's one of the questions Winfrey will ask.
[For the record, 12:40 p.m.: An earlier version of this post said that Oprah spoke to Rowling at her home; instead, they met at a hotel.]
-- Carolyn Kellogg
Photo: J. K. Rowling with Oprah Winfrey. Credit: Harpo Productions Inc.
So What! This is important why?
Posted by: Eric | September 28, 2010 at 09:33 AM
The image begs the question. Why do liberals hate 'The Rich'...., Except rich liberals.....? Personally, I like rich people and believe they already pay to much tax. Money taken from the producers and given to the users (government) does not create jobs or wealth.
Posted by: Mea Sententia | September 28, 2010 at 09:46 AM
Because rich liberals like Oprah are perfectly fine paying high taxes.
Posted by: J | September 28, 2010 at 10:54 AM
Oprah can afford to be a liberal.
Posted by: El Guapo de la ciudad de Los Angeles | September 28, 2010 at 11:48 AM
Who is this Oprah person you keep referring to? Was she the one that was in that old movie The Color Purple back in the 80s? And isn't that whole Harry Potter schtick over already? Who cares?
Posted by: ronald mcdonald | September 28, 2010 at 01:09 PM
Man, I am so amazed that anyone would care about this article that I have to voice my opinion on the internet for everyone to see! Harry Potter Schmarry Potter! We don't need that rich witch JK Rowling indoctrinating our children into her satanic rituals that make our lord jesus cry. And Oprah, PUH-LEEZE! She's worse than a satanist! She's a lie-beral! She's using that batty Brit to indoctrinate our childrens into socialism! Well I, for one, won't be watching! Little American flags for everyone! USA USA USA
Posted by: someguyontheinternet | September 28, 2010 at 02:22 PM
Seriously, people? This is the LA Times! And of course it's relevant. Go back to your Sudoku if you don't think a rare interview with one of the world's most successful authors is newsworthy for the Books section.
Posted by: Shelly | September 28, 2010 at 02:46 PM
Wow! neither women has any wrinkles or signs of aging on the face.
What's The Secret?
Billionaire Botox, I guess.
Posted by: Lady Jane | September 28, 2010 at 04:17 PM
someguyontheinternet: Time to crawl back under that rock of yours. What a twit!!!
Posted by: LSCH | September 30, 2010 at 06:32 AM