Harry Potter and the Dubious Hullabaloo

Meta
Title:	Harry Potter and the Dubious Hullabaloo
Creator:	jodel from aol
Date(s):	July 17, 2007
Medium:	online
Fandom:	Harry Potter
Topic:
External Links:	Harry Potter and the Dubious Hullabaloo, Archived version; page 2, Archived version; page 3, Archived version
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

Harry Potter and the Dubious Hullabaloo is a 2007 essay by jodel from aol.

The essay has 92 comments posted.

Some Topics Discussed in the Essay and Comments

• the "pirated" copy of the last book in the Harry Potter series ("Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows"), see The Carpet Book
• conspiracy theories, manipulation, profit
• much speculation regarding page counts
• why was the pirate copy photographed rather than scanned on a flatbed scanner? "But I really do suspect that photographing the book was done for verisimilitude."
• TPTB and tricks: "They do seem to have played fair with us. All of the clues were out there in public, all easily accessible. And Rowling, or somebody, seems to have made sure that the links to them would all reach her fans. Either from her own official website or from the big news sites to whom she has given Fan Site awards on the official site. I am inclined to think the inception for the stunt took place around the time of Rowling’s appearance with Stephen King and John Grisholm in the ‘Harry, Carrie and Garp’ presentation at the beginning of August, 2006. And I think it started with Rowling."
• speculation on a second "pirated" book uploaded on July 18th
• The New York Times's book review on July 19th, which subsequently removed: "Frankly, I am bemused that the New York bloody Times would do something so “unprofessional” as to publically [sic] post a review of a forthcoming book, particularly one with such notoriously exaggerated security measures surrounding it, several days before the official release, merely on the strength of ONE distributor having broken the terms of their agreement with the publishers and shipped the book early (that much has been confirmed, evidently). Doesn’t future good will with the publishers count for anything? The review claims that the reviewer had purchased the book from an unnamed source."
• includes a link to the New York Times' book review (An Epic Showdown as Harry Potter Is Initiated Into Adulthood)
• a likely reference to the article Potter fanfic writer launches first book

From the Essay

It is the final count-down week before the release of the seventh Harry Potter volume, and a sudden uproar has appeared upon the horizon. The circus has come to town. According to the tale, libraries have allegedly been given a special dispensation to un-crate the books in advance for early cataloguing. Someone has reputedly stolen a library copy, and, with the help of a digital camera is uploading it to the internet as fast as they can save the files — a whole week early! [...] And by this weekend you may have the opportunity to point and laugh at this post as well. Because I am going out on a limb here, and we may all soon find out if the fat lady bounces. But I want to get this out in public before the weekend in the event that I am right.

I say the leaked “spoiler novel” is a hoax.

If I am correct, JK Rowling, in company with Arthur Levine of Scholastic have led the fans a merry dance, with a big reveal of the joke scheduled for either the weekend of the 7th book’s release, or very soon afterwards. I do not know how many other people are in on the game, but I would hazard a guess that there are several. Quite possibly including [[[Melissa Aneli]] and Emerson Spartz of the Leaky Cauldron and Mugglenet, respectively, who have been instrumental in dispensing the clues to the fandom, although their participation may have been unwitting.

I admit that my inner conspiracy theorist often needs a firm reigning in, and this does appear to be turning into one of the occasions that might call for that. But IF this was an inside job, that would explain how they got all the details right.

Because the details all seem absolutely, and unmistakably, right. I have not seen the pirated book in toto, but I have seen some of the shots, specifically the opening page, the Table of Contents, and the purported Epilogue.

If this is a hoax from anyone other than Scholastic themselves, there is no guarantee that the real book will have the same physical features. The real book may not have red end papers, a golden yellow spine binding, and sort of a greenish-grey binding cloth (that color may be a distortion from the light source in the photographs, the actual color seems neutral enough for it to be possible that there is some degree of color shift). If it is an in-house hoax from Scholastic, it almost certainly will.

What clinches it for me as being from Scholastic is the artwork. I have only seen four of the “pirate” copy’s chapter head illos. The one at the opening of chapter 1, and the one at the opening of the epilogue, plus two others that were posted separately, the one for chapter 7, and the one for chapter 23. If those illos are not Mary GrandPre’s own art I will eat my Hat (those of you who attended Lumos will no doubt remember that Hat). And I very much doubt that the rest of the chapter head illos in the photographed book are suddenly in some other artist's style.

Now, who is most likely to have 37 fresh, new, highly recognizable pieces of Mary GrandPre’s chapter head art just lying around unused?

So, if all the details are right, why do I question the authenticity of the pirate copy?

Because, as usual with anything associated with Rowling, the numbers don’t add up.

They quite literally do not add up.

So, why should they have done this?

Well, I think it all comes down to “for fun and profit”. Amazon may not be making any money off of this book but Scholastic is. I think they could afford it. Print a limited edition with everyone in on the joke to get a copy, and probably a box of them to Rowling. And if you ever get a chance at one ouy [sic] might want to consider it. Highly collectable, after all.

But the emphasis is probably on the “fun” end of the scale. And that’s where Rowling comes in. It all may just be my inner conspiracy theorist gettng [sic] out of control, but I think that a decoy story turned loose by a publishing house which stands to make a bomb, and a very wealthy and famous author with a demonstrated apreciation [sic] for the idea of practical jokes is easier to believe than that the publishing house should lie about their book. By the time they made their page count announcement they knew how long the 7th volume was going to be.

I do think they might, between them, have decided to underwrite a limited edition of ‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Ballyhoo’ as a publicity stunt. It is, after all, the last hurrah for the series, as a series. Why not wind it all up with a bang?

And they certainly didn’t do it on the spur of the moment. I'm looking back over a phantom trail that stretches for nearly a year.

My next scrap of maybe-evidence is far enough off-canon that I am not at all sure of the time frame, but I am pretty sure the link originally showed up on one of the major fandom news sites. To be honest, my recollection is vague enough that it may be completely out to lunch, or conflated from multiple sources, but I am not making it up. This one was an article regarding fanfic, and fanfic writers, in which, iirc, there was a brief reference to a youngster (not one whose name was familiar to me) who had actually been commissioned to write a fanfic story. I think that it was a Harry Potter fanfic story. There may well have been a mention of Deathly Hallows in the article, which would put it around January at the earliest, but I will not swear to that. There was no mention of Rowling’s involvement, and she was not quoted in the article, so I doubt that it is to be found upon any of the Rowling interview sites.

If this is the case, and that unassuming little blurb was a shout-out that one lucky fan was commissioned to write a Harry Potter story, the pirate copy may well be that story. If so, the fan was probably paid on a work-for-hire basis, and Scholastic owns the copyright. The kid will get her day in the sun in the big reveal this weekend.

Now we sit back and wait for the big reveal of the Sting.

I cannot answer for the authenticity of the next paragraph of the pirate copy. And for that matter, I am not going to speculate farther on just how much of the pirate copy might actually be legitimate.

Those could be the real chapter titles, with the fanfic's text massaged to comply with them while the real volume 7 was undergoing the editorial process.

Those could be the legitimate chapter head illos. Or they could be a whole second set commissioned from the artist especially for the decoy. If so, it could have been set up months ago.

Most (not all) of the chapter titles [in the second book's uploaded images] actually look a bit more plausible than in the first version. And it has a MUCH more typical title page. However, the one page of the opening to the epilogue strikes me as far less plausable [sic], given that it directly contradicts statements actually made by Rowling. Admittedly it was in a session back during the 3-year summer and she may have changed her mind, but still. Nor does the two page opening of the purported chapter 3 strike me as a particularly likely direction for Rowling to be taking the story. Unforgivable curses used for mere convenience? I don't think so.

There is no indication of how long this version of the book or of the epilogue supposedly are, either, it would take something in the neighborhood of 30 pages of epilogue to bring it up to the 784 total, but that seems a bit in excess of the requirements.

I am frankly unconvinced that there really is a 2nd version of the complete book. I think we've got a 2-stage scam here. The page numbers for the chapters of the 2nd version are exactly the same as those of the first. If someone was producing a competing hoax copy of the book, the chapter lengths would not all fall out as the same length as those of a separate, independently produced hoax. And this would have been an easy enough thing to tweak for verisimilitude.

This version is piggy-backing on the first one, and it was designed to piggy-back on that first one. And to be seen to be piggy-backing on the first one. There is no evidence that any more of this version exists than the ToC and the sample pages shown in the side-by-side comparison.

Ergo: It is all a part of the same hoax.

The N.Y. Times is swearing up and down that their book is “genuine”.

Well, it is genuinely a book. I’ll willingly grant them that. I genuinely doubt that Rowling wrote it.

They also still claim that it has 759 pages.

A missing piece of the puzzle clicked into place on one of my discussion boards this morning. Someone on the board took the time to get out to her local public library yesterday and take a look at their copies of the books.

Every. Single. One. ...was the same length as the general release editions of those books. Same page count, same everything but the binding. There were about 4 of the 6 sitting on the shelves. Color me not surprised.

So. From the looks of things, Scholastic has never before reformatted their books for a seperate [sic] library edition. I am now inclined to doubt that they have done so this time, either. Ergo: I am now seriously doubting the existance [sic] of any 759-page “library” edition of JK Rowling’s ‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows’.

So, why should Scholastic lead us to believe that there is one?

Well, if, as I have been contending, this was an in-house hoax, they would have announced that there was one because they knew the bogus copy (copies?) was that length. The cover story is that the leaked pirate copy was allegedly stolen from a library.

And perhaps the medicine will go down smoother if we all start calling it a “prank” rather than a “hoax”.

Fan Comments

[jodel from aol: original poster]:

Do you know? It belatedly occurs to me that there is a built-in audience for a limited print run of the decoy novel.

There is a big gala scheduled for soon after the release, isn't there? With a limited number of attendees.

I’ve heard of keynote speeches with special gifts given to all those who signed up for them...

heidi8]:

Are you aware that Scholastic has obtained subpoenas to learn the identity of the person who first uploaded the photos? Does that sound like a company that's trying to hoax the most ardent fans, or a company that is doing the same thing they did before Book 6 - trying to keep the book's contents away from the public?

Also, I'm not on tlc staff anymore but when I was a reporter there, we posted the *same* spoiler policies that you're citing to as evidence that tlc was in on some hoax and conspiracy, whether deliberately or because they've been duped, and I find that sort of accusation really troubling.

[jodel from aol]: No I wasn't aware of that. Thank you! Like I say there is a good chance that we are going to all find out whether the fat lady bounces.

Actually, what I said is that Both Leaky and Mugglenet chimed in with Rowling on an agreement NOT to post spoilers *if they can help it*, and the *only* thing that has been posted that could be construed *as a spoiler* was the link to the Guardian article.

Which has now *deleted* the alleged shot of the opening paragraph.

However, IF it is all a game with a Playfair-compliant collection of clues, Leaky and Mugglenet did post the links to the *clues*. In order for the attentive fans TO be able to figure it out. If it is not a game, then the whole thing is a chimera and, obviously, nonsense.

[heidi8]: Actually, I *was* helping the publishers back when HBP came out, and if I had any information about stores or libraries opening book boxes and distributing copies early, or learned of anything like that station in Tampa that was going to start reading the book on air the friday of release, I'd tell them again.

But I'm a lawyer, and I could get disbarred if I was going around and knowingly lying about the book being real - and Scholastic's lawyers would incur amazing fines and risk disbarment as well if they lied to a court about whether the book was really by JKR to get an injunction.

I can't imagine anyone would risk that. I certainly wouldn't.

[j. lunatic]: If Scholastic is taking legal action, that could be a ploy to 1) crack down on people who have gotten and are posting genuine copies; and 2) appear to be cracking down on their people who are circulating the decoys. In fact, how do I know you're not actually an agent of the publisher's, helping to keep the hoax going? *mostly joking*

[furiosity]: Or maybe it's as simple as this: publishers knew full well that the book would leak no matter what they did. So they released incorrect page counts just to keep people guessing until the end. At least, that sounds far easier to do than fake a whole manuscript.

[shezan]: I'd like to believe you, but quite honestly, the reasoning sounds like the one used to explain 9/11 was planned by George W. Bush, the Illuminati and the Trilateral conference. The amount of time expended on such a sophisticated fake makes it highly unlikely.

[raistlinbrown]: Yeah, I'm beginning to think the title should have been "Harry Potter and Occam's Razor." I can't believe how caught up in this I've gotten and how much energy I've expended on reading about this when I've never even read any of the books.

[house illrepute]:

how are pages determined by publishers and advertisers? because the numbers never -- and i mean never -- add up with regard to what's advertised and what the story is.

OotP, for example, is advertised on Amazon as pg.896 (hardcover) and 870 (softcover)... but, if you look at your actual book, for the actual last page number of the actual story... what is it? it's not 896, that's for sure. mine isn't. my softcover stops at like 844 or something. that's 26 pages of discrepency [sic].

i'm thinking retailers count the pages from the FRONT cover to the BACK cover... don't they? regardless of the content within those pages, right? if you count all the pages of the 'leak', including the dedication, the blank pages in the back (that they've all had), the ABOUT THE AUTHOR, and the TOC, the numbers add up.

and, isn't that how it's always been?

i do hope, however, that i've been PWNED... i LOVE being part of a hoax (meaning: having it done TO me)... and it would be a great, wondrous surprise if i read that SPOILER hadn't SPOILER with SPOILER and then SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER with SPOILER SPOILER of the SPOILER SPOILER ... because really! i mean, SPOILER ..??? for real?? come on! SPOILER shouldn't have SPOILER SPOILER !! SPOILER wouldn't DO that?! it's like SPOILER and SPOILER SPOILER didn't even happen!!

[jodel from aol]:

I think that if there is anything at all to the idea that it was an in-house hoax, then it was done in fun.

[house illrepute]: i still think that puts a little too much stock in the 'they care' theory... but, i really do hope it is. like i've said to other places: i love being pwned like that and that 'leak' was simply bad. seriously.... it would be to Potterverse what Matrix 3 was to the Matrix series

as an aside, why would they care???

the book has already outsold itself in PRESALES hasn't it?

why go thru all this nonsense when THE MONEY IS IN THE BANK.

even i, who have read the fake TWICE, haven't canceled my pre-order... and i STILL plan on buying all the adult versions.

this leak isn't going to bankrupt WB.

why spend money to do all of this when it serves them no purpose??

the type of people who would go "meh, i know how it ends now i'm not gonna buy the book" probably wouldn't have bought the book to begin with, except at some bargain bin...

no, no.

there's no profit in this.

altho' the 'hoax' side of it... that would be funny. if people could make fake, elaborate movie previews (Dennis Hopper, i'm looking at you) for the shits and giggles, then certainly being able to pwn all the "nyah nyah i know who dies" people would be just as inviting!

oooh, i HOPE i was pwned!!!

[sander123]:

I'm not sure, your arguments sound a bit like loose change. But I would love to read another book on saturday :) So I hope you are right.

There are many good things in the "leaked" DH (good backstories, the excitement, the romance), and the style is very Rowling...

One thing I don't understand: what would they gain? The company doesn't care about people shocked to hear spoilers, it cares about money...

[taradiane]:

Yeah, except I know two people who work at bookstores who say they are just sitting in taped-up boxes in the back room, no security measures taken whatsoever. Whose to say that one of those boxes hasn't already been opened by someone who was closing up shop, and re-taped? Not to be noticed until the day they're technically authorized to be opened?

I have a friend who has had access to the book (librarian), told me pretty much everything early last week, and it matches what the scanned pages are showing.

Unless they've sent a set of guards with every shipment of books, there is no physical way they can prevent people from looking and releasing info before Saturday.

An interesting note, however, is that I have another friend who was apparently emailed a copy of the book (I don't know the format, if it was pdf or photos or whatever, but it happened a few days prior to when I know the photographed version to surface). She thought it was legit, and some of the info inside does match what I was told by my source - and some of it very much does not. So yes, there is a fake copy going around, but I don't think this most recent one is, in fact, a hoax.

[mrspad00t1]:

I'm pretty certain that it is indeed the American version that was leaked. If you consider grammatical placement and spellings, then it certainly looks like the American version. (Two spaces behind a period, double quotes, that sort of thing). However, what I felt screamed 'fake' where the inconsistencies in the text. "Hermione Jean Granger" rather than "Hermione Jane Granger," the fact that Hermione claims to have placed a memory charm on her parents early on in the novel then later tells Harry she'd never done one before.

I've said, for about three days now, that this had to be something engineered by Rowling's camp. (The first leaked copy anyway). There were far too many things accessible that looks quite authentic i.e., the artwork, title pages, the binding etc, for it to be the work of an amateur.

The woman has a plethora of tools readily available to her, making this 'fake' book theory seem plausible. Further, when you consider all the hype about the security coupled with the fact that the booked was 'leaked' too easily and uploaded too quickly, things simply do not add up.

She seemed quite protective about releasing any information and to deflect the public's attention with a 'fake' book would certainly make the real contents of the book harder to obtain.

Just my opinion anyway.

... I'm using the series in my thesis. Can could I possibly defend this book if it's real?

*shudders*

[elizardbits]: ...an elaborate hoax such as the one you suggest truly strikes me as the kind of thing that Stephen King's twisted mind would think up, and suggest to JRK.

[jodel on aol]: Rowling *likes* the idea of "set-up" pranks. In fact she has pubicly [sic] stated that one of her most embarassing [sic] moments was when she tried to do one and it backfired on her.

[katiemorris]:

Very interesting, but I feel most unlikely. However, I have not had the chance (and would not take it if I had) to look at the leaked copy so I'm not spoiled so the entire thing is academic to me. I do hope that nobody has spoiled the entire internet with a legitimate copy of the book, but would not be unbearably surprised.

What WOULD surprise me if nobody "official" acutally [sic] mentions the leaked copy. When OoTP was found in a field, and HBP was leaked, there were stories in the news for us all to read. There has been nothing, NOTHING, in the news about a leak this time. And this, I find intriguing.

You could be right. Either way I don't really care because I'm not going to click on any spoilers, and am staying away from newspapers and t'interweb until Saturday.

[karelia]: Thank you for this, I absolutely agree with you! And contrary to many comments, I do believe that Scholastic could make a killing out of such a hoax in the long run. Firstly, such a limited edition could become very valuable in a very short time. Secondly, even fifty years down the line, potential readers will be drawn in when they hear about the biggest publishing hoax of the century - they'll simply buy the HP books for that reason.

[moosetoss]:

The only issue I have with your theory is this ::

If it is all for fun and games, then why aren't they advertising the Pirated copy? Why are the publishers taking ALL of these precautions to shut down links and popular hostsites (like photobucket and youtube) from advertising the book?

Why is no one except for a handful of popular bloggers talking about this pirated book?

If it's to jump start sales, why are the Publishers and people working alongside them working SO DAMNED HARD on keeping people from obtaining knowledge about this leak?

If it was for fun and games, they would be nudging the press to go all ballistic about it so that when the book actually comes out, it can be revealed as an amazing hoax.

But they aren't. They're keeping it as hush as possible

That's why I'm sticking to my guns that it ain't a hoax.

It seems so improbable that for a fun and game, the Publishers sure aren't nudging people into it (in fact, they are trying to keep people from knowing about it.)

[super millie]:

I was avoiding spoilers like all hell and then someone added me that had a big FLASHING spoiler on their profile when I went to check if they wanted to add me back. I'm still refusing to read this pirate copy. Flat out REFUSING! It sounds pretty pathetic though, and reading the excerpt on this other profile, to me it just didn't seem to flow like JKR's writing usually would... *shrugs*

I'll almost be glad when this is over... *headdesk*

[bonfoi]:

If you had one of the most famous series in current literary history, wouldn't you want it to go out with a bang? A hoax would ensure that the book was on everyone's minds, including those adverse to it, and the media would broadcast it from entertainment programs to soft news to hard news...talk about free publicity.

Yep! The inner-conspiracy-theorist says you could be on to something. And, if nothing else, the speculation was grammatically correct. *lol*

[eeyore6771]:

Well, Jodel, I hope you're right. But if this is a hoax from Scholastic, or even from Jo, and it's meant to be funny--I'm not laughing. I don't want spoilers right before the book, and now I'm afraid to go on-line or watch the news on TV or listen to the radio in my car.

This would be right up there with our friends who pretended they were engaged, then told us they were joking. It was not funny being made to feel like a fool. And I'll be highly annoyed if the hoax (and I hope it is) is from the publisher.

[vanceone]:

Well, of course it's a hoax. Over at my forum, we've been discussing this alleged leak. There are so many issues with it. From JKR forgetting how her magic works, to mispellings [sic] and other blatant errors. It's got the artwork, true, but the cheese factor and enough errors to stretch to breaking point rather confirms it for me that it's fake.

Why would Scholastic do it? Well, they KNEW the book would be spoiled. So they did a pre-emptive strike. This leak has muddied up the waters that if there were any real spoilers, who would know or believe it? That protects the security, too--and gives Scholastic another arrow in their quiver to protect the series ending, besides just tapes, sealing and tracking devices

[Anonymous]:

Well I have FURTHER news on this leak situation...

I have been corresponding with someone all night who has claimed to have read the two incriminating leaked versions AND the book itself. Their best friend is a librarian and both have read it together since it was delivered to them only a day or two ago... Do I believe them? Yes. LONG story short, I do. They seem to be in a prime position where they can gain access to the book. They were also kind enough NOT to leak anything HOWEVER they DID tell me... that whilst both leaks were cleaver, they don't compare to the book. There are numerous inconsistencies with not only the plots of the leaked copies, but they contradict one another. Another important inconsistency to point out is that in the latest leak, a chapter image shows (COULD BE POTENTIAL SPOILER IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE THIS) Dudley with white (signifying blonde) hair. We know Dudley is NOT this light, though this is ONE small aspect. The person said they could pick out others.

They also said that whilst the leaked versions are smart deceptions, they are just fan-fics. They could care less for them, but loved the REAL BOOK so much that they would buy it over ten fold. And that the real version has FEW inconsistencies, which makes me excited.

Real or not, for now I am believing this person's story. I trust them. And it kinda makes sense. The more I those leaked versions the more they reach of FAKE!!! But I an now heading off to bed (it's now 4.14am in OZ) to rest my head and be at peace knowing that we don't have much to worry about. Here's hoping anyway.

[darsynia]:

"(see icon)"

I have suspected since I saw it that Scholastic was behind it, and everything I've seen of it bears that out. A lot of us have debated as to whether a publisher would screw up main character names so badly (see icon), but would a die-hard fan with the resources to make such an elaborate hoax mess up like that either?

It seems highly unlikely.

[pinstripeafter3]: If I was Scholastic and I knew I wouldn't be able to stop the spoilers, I absolutely would consider flooding the internet with tons of fake spoilers and piles of contradictory stuff, because then when actual spoilers do get out, it will be impossible to tell the real from the fake. And in this strategy, the bigger the fake spoilers, the better. And if that's what happened, then IT'S WORKING. There's tons of stuff out there, and NO ONE can tell 100% for sure what's real and what's not. The fandom is in pandemonium.

[Anonymous]:

I love the pandemonium. We'll all find out of course in one or two more sleeps. I'm so pumped and excited. From what this person who has read the real one tells me, Jo answers pretty much everything... so that's awesome. I hope they are right. There are bound to be small things left out, but I doubt they will be hugely important.

[Anonymous]: Guys does Jo use swearing and/or sexual innuendo (penis jokes/metaphors, etc)?

[jodel from aol]: Well it must be admitted that her innuendo is more typically related to other bodily functions. Of the, "Can I see Uranus, Lavender?" variety, and has stated that she had to skate around the swearing, since Ron would have been the kind of boy who swears.

But she dances around both, yes.

[Anonymous]: Oh I know but the 'carpet leak' as it is called, uses blatant jokes, etc. There is apparently no dancing around it but, more sleeping with it! Jo would never do that to her younger audience. But apparently someone who has seen the copy of DH has confirmed now the carpet one is real. SO many fans will hate this. If it is real, (I still doubt it, they could be lying AND have heard another say they have read the real thing and confirm that the two leaks were both so far off) then the entire fandom will be in uproar. The leak is crap. Very much so. I for one will probably no longer be a fan having just read parts of what others have said. Bit as I doubt it is real, I think that even if I were to be disappointed (as some will become) would still be a great fan of the series.

[Anonymous (two days after the book was officially released)]: So the fake was real... but I loved the book. Not perfect, but for a plot so complex, Jo didn't drop the ball, and pulled the series together well. Again not perfect but a superb book none the less. What did you think Jodel... or anyone else?