He's like the cute Brit who played Tom Riddle in Chamber of Secrets.

Yeah, just like that kid.

??

(She abuses adverbs, though.)

Stephen King, who was a big fan, was on her case about this constantly in his EW reviews. I think she dialed it down in the last book because of those critiques. Or possibly her editors took to lopping off words ending in -ly, especially after "said".

Or possibly her editors took to lopping off words ending in -ly, especially after "said".

HAH.

Nobody edited the last few books. Why should they? They were guaranteed to sell, even if there were misspellings on every page.

Okay, there was probably a single copy-editing pass (for typos and obvious errors), but I bet no more than that.

Yeah, just like that kid.

That guy was a grownup!

??

I wrote words I didn't mean to be taken as true for rhetorical effect?

I'm just saying there seems to be unending pipeline of handsome, charismatic, talented British actors with fancy sharp cheekbones.

Okay, there was probably a single copy-editing pass (for typos and obvious errors), but I bet no more than that.

She's commented that she could've used more editing on Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix. She does stop abusing the "she said amusedly" type construction by the last book.

From Wikipedia, a few King quotes on the series.

Stephen King called the series "a feat of which only a superior imagination is capable", and declared "Rowling's punning, one-eyebrow-cocked sense of humour" to be "remarkable". However, he wrote that despite the story being "a good one", he is "a little tired of discovering Harry at home with his horrible aunt and uncle", the formulaic beginning of all seven books. King has also joked that "Rowling's never met an adverb she did not like!" He does however predict that Harry Potter "will indeed stand time's test and wind up on a shelf where only the best are kept; I think Harry will take his place with Alice, Huck, Frodo, and Dorothy and this is one series not just for the decade, but for the ages".

I just started listening to the first book, and I was kind of shocked and confused by the beginning. I had completely forgotten that it starts out following Vernon Dursley, like, forever. I seriously thought the first scene of the book was Dumbledore dropping Harry off at the Dursleys', but that's just because that's the first scene of the movie.

It started out kind of slow, but, man, the "Letters from Nowhere" chapter is SO AWESOME. It's kind of fun to go back to the beginning and experience the magic, as it were.

The first book is so different in tone, and definitely shows the shaping hand of a good editor. That said, it does go on quite a bit more with the Dursleys and I think that is a kind of debt that Rowling owes to Roald Dahl's novels with the exceptionally difficult and abusive childhoods portrayed. I'm thinking particularly of James and the Giant Peach, but also Charlie's crushing poverty, and the horrible Giants of the BFG.

And Matilda! Vernon and Petunia could be directly modeled off of Matilda's parents.

And Jane Eyre. Dead parents, an aunt who resents having to raise you, a very spoiled cousin (ok Jane had 3 of these), and school becomes an escape. I actually didn't like the first book at all the first time I read it because it seemed to just be stealing from so many classic stories. It took me a while to give the rest of the series a try.