The Casual Vacancy question

The part where Terri Weedon's acquaintances kept dying off "as if participating in a war no one else knew about" definitely sounded like a Potter reference to me! I also thought of HP with the cupboard thing. Of course the book is nothing like HP, but that doesn't mean there can't be sly references to it.

No. There was also a reference to a common person as a "mug", but that's not HP either. HP drew on real life so another book based in real life will have things in common with it, it's unavoidable. I only wish there had been more commonality with HP *sigh*

No. No book was ever LESS like an HP one. Don't read unless you've got a strong stomach for violence against children (child abuse, no Dark wizardry) and violence in general. I think JKR is great, but this book is not what her fans were expecting.

Could be. Who knows? It did make in newspaper, didn't it?

I saw this too and thought - "oh my gosh! Did she sneak that in there as a subtle joke?!" Obviously related in no way to our Harry but still, I found it quite amusing..

She DID say that there was absolutely no similarity/relation to Harry Potter... But I think it's possible that she slid that one in as a subtle joke... Although Vernon Dursley was OBVIOUSLY not Harry's step-father, so it may also be coincidence... Having said that, previous experience shows that nothing's ever a coincidence with Rowling so idk.

I think it was a reference about how Harry was forced to live that cupboard for so long- yeah might been his uncle- but what other work has a kid living in a cupboard? It sounds like it could be a reference to the treatment he faced and she decided to connect the themes. Just because this isn't a hp related book doesn't mean the author can't make subtle references to it. Honestly I think she might have so if we do read hp for the upteenth time again we will see it more than what it was before. So 50-50 on if it is but in my opinion I think it is. Making a reference doesn't mean the book is anything like this one.

I don't think anyone is trying to turn this into a Harry Potter book at all. It's not unreasonable at all to think that J.K. would leave a reference like that in the book, knowing that many adult HP fans will read this one. To me, it actually felt like her definitively saying to her readers, "This is not a Harry Potter book. This is not a children's novel, and here's the main difference. In a children's novel, a boy forced to live in a cupboard can be presented as humorous and light-hearted, a place where a young boy can make friends with the spiders. But in this book, in the real world, a family member forcing a boy to live in a cupboard is horrible and is considered abuse. This is an adult novel, and now you know." And actually, the more I think about it, it seems impossible to me that J.K. would make a point about mentioning a boy in a cupboard and not recognize that her fans would see it a nod to her past work. If she didn't want her readers to think that, she would have taken it out, no doubt in my mind.

No, people have to stop scouring the book for references to Harry Potter. This is not Harry Potter, and it never pretended to be. The book is quite disturbing but I really enjoyed it, it raised some great issues. Please stop trying to turn this into Harry Potter: The Adult Years.

I believe that was when Kay was talking about the past cases she has seen? I didn't think that had to do anything with Harry Potter but there were other instances which I thought hinted at Harry Potter.

One of the most unrealistic parts about Harry Potter is that after the abuse and neglect of his childhood, he was still heroic Harry Potter. That can happen in a fantasy novel. But in reality, such an upbringing would yield a guy more like Andy Price. Not such a bad guy, but no hero either.

i really don't know how people are coming up with these ideas.it really annoys me. Why should it be a HP reference in the first place? It's a completely different book intended for completely different audiances. This book absolutely has nothing to do with Harry Potter except that they were both written by J.K.Rowling. i understand that people love HP books but Harry Potter series ended. maybe she'll write something HP related some time in the future, but this book is not it. Is it really that hard to accept that J.K. may write about something other than Harry Potter?

I really don't think so. In fact cases like that are a tragic reality. Perhaps it is more of a chicken and egg situation where Rowling used a very really abusive situation first in Harry Potter to indicate the abusive situation he was living in. Only to then use it in Vacancy because it happens and you hear about it in the news frequently.