I have a confession to make: recently I re-read Roald Dahl's 'The Witches', which I loved as a child—for the sole reason that a young boy is transformed into a mouse, and stays that way. I understand that Dahl was incensed with Nicolas Roeg for changing that aspect of the tale.

I don't love 'The Witches' now. Indeed I feel that Roald Dahl is a betrayer of literature, because he wrote that book. It's an antisemitic conspiratorial screed given the thinnest possible veneer of fantasy, disguised as a charming folk tale from the narrator's kindly grandma.

Which brings me to Ms. J.K. Rowling, who is easily as bigoted as Roald Dahl ever was. The #HarryPotter books drip with bigotry, and I think there's every reason to suspect that this is exactly why J. K. Rowling has a fanatically dedicated fanbase, even though she's bad at writing.

J.K. Rowling J.K. Rowling gives her fanatical fans a thing they desperately need: a cartoon version of the world in which Good™ people, the folks who *really matter*, are always pretty (and pasty-looking), and the Bad™ people are always fat and ugly and incompetent.

Bigotry, in other words.

J.K. Rowling This isn't just about antisemitic 'sinister bankers' trope that one gets from #HarryPotter , Hogwarts Legacy, etc. It's all across the board.

Rowling writes *all* of her characters in a flimsy, stereotypical fashion, pervaded with an overwhelming obsession with superficial looks.

J.K. Rowling Hogwarts Legacy That's what bigotry boils down to: superficiality.

A bigot—whether it's J.K. Rowling or Kathleen Stock or Julie Bindel or Matt Walsh or any typical politician in the GOP (or The Democrats) or Conservatives—puts absolute faith in their snap judgments and first impressions of people.

J.K. Rowling Hogwarts Legacy Kathleen Stock Julie Bindel Matt Walsh GOP The Democrats Conservatives If they're not going on *looks*, they're going on *data*.

Matt Walsh &c. think their bigotry is 'rational' because of government crime statistics and The SAT Program scores and other such trash—making the same snap judgments about *data* that they make about lips and noses.