The Harry Potter Series: Plagiarism or Coincidence?
Pieces put together by BioPlague

The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
-- Albert Einstein​

I. Intro

It's been about ten years since the first Harry Potter book, The Sorcerer's Stone, came out and supposedly - according to J.K. Rowling - seventeen years since she first started work on the series we've come to love and write fanfiction about.

pla·gia·rism /ˈpleɪdʒəˌrɪzəm, -dʒiəˌrɪz-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pley-juh-riz-uhm, -jee-uh-riz-] Pronunciation Key - –noun
1. the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.[1]​

Public domain comprises the body of knowledge and innovation (especially creative works such as writing, art, music, and inventions) in relation to which no person or other legal entity can establish or maintain proprietary interests within a particular legal jurisdiction. This body of information and creativity is considered to be part of a common cultural and intellectual heritage, which, in general, anyone may use or exploit, whether for commercial or non-commercial purposes. Only about 15 percent of all books are in the public domain, and 10 percent of all books that are still in print.

If an item ("work") is not in the public domain, it may be the result of a proprietary interest such as a copyright, patent, or other sui generis right. The extent to which members of the public may use or exploit the work is limited to the extent of the proprietary interests in the relevant legal jurisdiction. However, when the copyright, patent or other proprietary restrictions expire, the work enters the public domain and may be used by anyone for any purpose.[2]​

With that in mind, we move forward. By no means is this a professional essay or even an attempt to create one - this is just a collection of various bits of information.

However, for the purposes of being taken serious and in hopes of sparking intelligent and civil discourse, I will provide links to each of my sources and clearly mark where my opinion comes in. I may make mistakes in doing this but it is my hope not to influence your opinion as some have criticized me for being capable of doing; instead, I hope you read this and come to your own conclusions.

By no means is this exhaustive. It is a work in progress and hopefully, through your participation, I (you as well) can come to a more enlightened conclusion as to what is fact, what is bitterness and half-truths and what is totally untruthful.

Without further ado, I will now present to you what I believe facts as of this posting - the question is, is it plagiarism on J.K. Rowling's part? Or is it coincidence?

II-A. The Worst Witch (1974)

"Miss Cackle's Academy of Witchcraft" is remarkably reminiscent of Hogwarts. The school is hosted in an ancient castle on a remote hill surrounded by a forest. Classes include potions, chants and broomstick flying. Though the headmistress is kind and understanding, the hooknosed Potions mistress is harsh and unpleasant. She is particularly cruel towards the protagonist, a young witch named Mildred Hubble - but Mildred's nemesis is her pet student.[3]​

Mildred Hubble was a trainee witch at Miss Cackle's Academy, and she was making an awful mess of it. She couldn't even ride a broomstick without crashing it and she was always getting her spells wrong. But she managed to get by until she turned Ethel, the teacher's pet, into her deadly enemy.[4]​

II-B. The Books of Magic (1990)

"Comic book fans have noted that a comic book series first published in 1990 by DC Comics called The Books of Magic by Neil Gaiman shares many similarities to Rowling's book. These include a dark haired young boy with glasses named Tim Hunter who discovers his own potential as the most powerful wizard of his age after being approached by magic wielding individuals, the first of whom gifts him with a pet owl."[5]​

Many people have noticed similarities between Timothy Hunter — a bespectacled English teenager with family troubles, a scar on his forehead and who has a magical owl as a pet — and the later and more famous Harry Potter. Neil Gaiman has been quoted as saying that while there are similarities between the two they are largely superficial and most likely reflect the fact that both draw on common archetypes.[6]​

"WDC: I read somewhere that some of the details in Rowling's books could be seen as borrowing from The Sandman comic books--I believe owls carrying messages for wizards was one example. Asked about this, Sandman creator and author Neil Gaiman's response was basically so what? Storytellers pick up bits and pieces from here, there and everywhere all the time as they create original works. The fact is that initially Gaiman did throw up his arms and yell plagiarism. It wasn't until he had a movie deal that his comments began to change. Initially he was terribly annoyed."[7]​

The movie company was Warner Brothers who has rights to "Potter."​

Swedish directors Simon Sandquist and Joel Bergvall have signed on to helm Warner Bros. Pictures' big-screen adaptation of DC Comics' Books of Magic, says The Hollywood Reporter. The comic, about a bespectacled teenager learning magic in contemporary London, is seen as a precursor to Harry Potter. It was first published as a mini-series by the DC in 1990. Neil Gaiman, the author of the original story and the novel, will serve as executive producer.[8]​

"... it turns out that Tim is no longer gonna be a 12-year-old, bespectacled English boy who's learning magic for some strange reason. He's gonna be about 16-17 and American and he'll still wear glasses, but they won't be so...round."[9]​

II-C. Wizard's Hall (1991)

I read the first three. The fourth one stopped me in my tracks, partially because even though the story moves along, I just don't feel like they're well written. Besides, I wrote a book called "Wizard's Hall" [in 1991, eight years before the first "Harry Potter" book]. And there's an awful lot of "Wizard's Hall" in it [the Harry Potter books]. I always tell people that if Ms. Rowling would like to cut me a very large check, I would cash it. ["Wizard's Hall"] has got a boy named Henry [who] goes to wizard school, doesn't think he has talent. He has a good friend with red hair. There's a wicked wizard who's trying to destroy the school, and the pictures on the wall move and speak and change. I have kids who write to me all the time and say, "I thought you had stolen Harry Potter, but my teacher pointed out that you published it eight years before Harry Potter." [10]​

In 1991, the author Jane Yolen released a book called Wizard's Hall, which bears resemblance to the Potter series and its characters. The main protagonist, Henry and not Harry (AKA Thornmallow), is a young boy who joins a magical school for young wizards. Yolen has been very critical of Rowling's work, and has complained publicly that she believes she stole her ideas. In an interview with the magazine Newsweek, Yolen said that "I always tell people that if Ms. Rowling would like to cut me a very large check, I would cash it."[11]​

The instant Henry casually "mentions wizardry to his dear ma," she packs him off to Wizard's Hall, with little more than a change of clothes and the advice that, whatever he might encounter, "it only matters that you try." Once at Wizard's Hall, Henry discovers that his magical talents are at best limited, but that even so, he must fulfill an ancient prophecy and help overthrow a powerful, evil wizard. Although he wants to give up, Henry--now dubbed Thornmallow--perseveres and tries his hardest.[12]​

II-D. The Secret of Platform 13 (1994)

The book has gained extra significance as many readers find it similar to the Harry Potter series by J.K. Rowling, although the first book of that series, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was published in 1997, three years after this book was published. As journalist Amanda Craig has written, "Ibbotson would seem to have at least as good a case for claiming plagiarism as the American author currently suing J. K. Rowling, but unlike her, Ibbotson says she would "like to shake her by the hand. I think we all borrow from each other as writers."[13]​

Eva Ibbotson's The Secret of Platform 13 (first published in 1994) features a gateway to a magical world located on an underground railway platform. The protagonist belongs to the magical world but is raised in our world by a rich family who neglect him and treat him as a servant, while their fat and unpleasant biological son is pampered and spoiled.[14]​

III. Rowling's Comments on Origin of Ideas

Amazon.co.uk: "Where did the ideas for the Harry Potter books come from?"
Rowling: "I've no idea where ideas come from and I hope I never find out, it would spoil the excitement for me if it turned out I just have a funny little wrinkle on the surface of my brain which makes me think about invisible train platforms."[15]​

"Where do you get your ideas from?"
"I wish I knew. Sometimes they just come (like magic) and other times I have to sit and think for about a week before I manage to work out how something will happen. Where the idea for Harry Potter actually came from I really couldn't tell you. I was traveling on a train between Manchester and London and it just popped into my head. I spent four hours thinking about what Hogwarts would be like - the most interesting train journey I've ever taken. By the time I got off at King's Cross many of the characters in the books had already been invented."[16]​

IV. Closing Thoughts

I always subconsciously thought Rowling was plagiarizing from The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien -- everyone in the fantasy genre does. And for that, I merely grumbled every once in awhile about how Horcruxes and various other subplot elements seemed ridiculously similar to what Tolkien penned over 50 years ago.

But when I stumbled onto this, I actually thought - hm. At first, I was very skeptical, since the first "plagiarism" case was one involving Stouffer, a rather bitter woman (as she comes off). She actually took the plagiarism to court and was punished with a somewhat hefty fine - she didn't win, needless to say.

But then I caught Jane Yolen and then various other people. I find it strange that Warner Brothers just happened to pick up the rights to the comic book!Harry Potter and has decided to assassinate his character while making the movie.

I'm also a bit shocked to find that a year before Philosopher's Stone was published, or rather, Sorcerer's Stone, Wizard's Hall was under the Scholastic Brand but was dropped. Remember, Rowling wasn't paid much by Bloomsbury, however, she was paid $105,000 for SS by Scholastic. Editing takes awhile, and if you recall, Philosopher's Stone had already been out a year, meaning that there was plenty of time for editors at Scholastic to already be plotting and planning, although to me, that seems less likely.

What I find even more ludicrous is the thought that Rowling spent over 5, yes - five - years coming up with the first book. Maybe even more, but she attests to having started writing in 1990. Needless to say, most of the books that show heavy signs of 'influence' on Potter were written around this time and especially the ones with plots and subplots ridiculously similar to Potter.

I find this hard to believe, largely because Philosopher's Stone is the smallest book in the series and I think it's pretty obvious if you read any of the books after Prisoner of Azkaban that there are heavy continuity issues between the power of magic (3 kids getting passed 7 tasks designed by teachers who can cast silent spells at 150MPH). I think it's safe to say that while she may have had an epilogue, that the journey between Book I and Book 7 Epilogue was hardly mapped out.

Five or more years doing that does not cement her as guilty of plagiarism - nothing I can present really does. One could claim coincidence and it's highly unlikely any of these authors want to go up against the legal teams of Warner Brothers, Scholastic or Bloomsbury... but five years doesn't help her any.

Personally, I agree with one of the quotes found above - that we all borrow from different authors when we write stuff. Hell, half the time we write, we're influenced by a song, a movie or another story or piece of literature. This is understandable.

But greats like Mark Twain and Albert Einstein have even said that the key to being claimed 'original' is to hide your sources. Is hiding your sources bullying the people who had the thought first? Is it dropping those books from mainstream print and making them almost impossible to find information about?

I think the main issue I have with Rowling is her inability to give credit where credit's do. She claims inspiration from C.S. Lewis and Jane Austen. Those are safe now, of course - one's Public Domain and the other I believe is expiring soon (I'm not certain). But I think she did get influence from these books - how could she not.

She's an English teacher who studied English, taught English and pursued a career in writing books for children. She pursued fantasy; to not have read them or deny reading them is not only unbelievable to me - it's dishonest. I think she has plagiarized but I only believe she has done so because she hasn't given praise to those who came before her, who helped define what she wrote and who have stories that are insanely similar to hers.

Castles with magic, prophecies for evil wizards, broomstick classes for flying, potions, kind heads of school, evil, hooked-nosed potions mistresses who hold a grudge against the protagonist... the list goes on.

I think she needs to broaden her word of thanks to Jane Yolen, Eva Ibbotson and Jill Murphy.

------
Draft 1. More information, sources, texts to be included soon.
------


[1] http://www.dictionary.com
[2] http://www.wikipedia.org
[3] http://www.wikipedia.org
[4] http://www.amazon.com
[5] WordIQ
[6] http://www.wikipedia.org
[7] http://www.washingtonpost.com
[8] Efavata.com
[9] GBM-net
[10] MSNBC.com
[11] http://www.wikipedia.org
[12] JaneYolen.com
[13] http://www.wikipedia.org
[14] http://www.wikipedia.org
[15] Cliphoto
[16] UK-oln.ac.uk

 

Wow, I recognized a lot of similarities with Neil Gaiman's series mainly because I'm a long time fan of his, but the Jane Yolen stuff caught me by surprise.

I think as time goes on more people will notice the similarities and speak up. Obviously they're not going to do it now because of JKR's current reign of power. Anyone who would try to say something would end up like Stouffer and basically laughed out of the courtroom.

 

I don't know about that. I understand she should give credit where credit is do but I also don't think when asked "where do you get the idea for Harry Potter?" she should spout a list of every fantasy author that used magical objects, castles, and boy wizards with the first name starting with H. I think it would be nice for her to mention that she was inspired by so and so for so and so scene, but I don't deem it necessary.

Fact of the matter is she may have looked at scenes from books and incorporated them into her series, but she made those scenes and concepts her own. She molded them into something that while similar was not the same. I think the points you presented are simply coincidental. The only instance I ever thought while reading "Hey she took that from this book!" was Aragog. A lot of the things she includes in her books in my opinion are staple fantasy plot points and characters. You have the average do-gooder, the smart friend, and the bubbling goofball. And then you have the sort of quest which causes the hero to mature and thus become at the end of the series a true hero.
Should she give more credit to past authors before her? Yes
Is it plagiarism because she didn't? No.

 

If people are going to complain about a child going to a magical school and facing a great evil, then they're going to have to complain about a good percentage of fantasy books.

Just like our knowledge of maths, biology and physics, literature is a process that is improved upon (occasionally) by future writers. Of course there are great works like Lord of the Rings, Homer's Iliad and Shakespeare's plays that live on well past the normal time of remembrance and set the standard for originality and quality. Mostly though, people are inspired by an idea they've seen somewhere and base their works on that idea.

There have been experiments on this sort of thing for ages - I remember one that was on tv where a few artists, or designers, or whatever, were taken on a car journey through London, where specific symbols and signs were placed where they would be seen. When they got to the place where the actual thing was held they were asked to draw some designs for a new clothing range (or something similar). Once they'd done that pictures of the things on the route were taken out of a safe and shown to them. Most of the designers had used the symbols and signs that were on the route (and in the safe). It just shows that subliminally we can pick up ideas from everywhere without noticing it ourselves.

This is applied to writing especially, because there are only so many ways you can write a story about a teenage wizard boy. Just like there are certain things that are naturally associated with evil (read: snakes) and villainy. Also, the typical portrayal of witches and wizards include lots of references to potions, broomsticks and chanting. For God's sake, the last two were shown in Macbeth! "Hubble, Bubble, Toil and Trouble' and all that rot.

I'm just saying that what most of these guys are complaining about are so overused as it is that it would be difficult to find a short list of them all. Jesus, abusive relatives that are kind to their nasty, biological son, that's so overused I could pick a random book up from the library and find it, even if its not the protagonist that suffers.

Ok, ok, let's look at this systematically:

II-A The Worst Witch
Very basic similarities with several differences - Harry is an average student, yeah, but he is capable of some very advanced magic. He's a natural on a broomstick. The evil teacher and their pet student is so common that you couldn't find a specific source for this.

II-B The Books of Magic
There are a few similarities here, most notably the appearance of the protagonist and the use of owls, but I find it unlikely that this is more than a coincidence. The appearance is a typical archetype for a troubled youth; dark hair to show the inner torment, glasses to show the outer weakness and a pet as the only one who loves him/her. Admittedly the owl post thing does suggest slight amount of inspiration from the series (which I haven't read), but since there's no quick way to transfer goods or letters due to the incompatibility of magic and electricity the only other reliable method is through trained animals. If I recall correctly the army has used carrier pigeons for hundreds of years, specifically training them to find certain locations instinctively. The step from a pigeon to owl isn't too far, and it reads much better with an owl than a dirty, flying rat.

II-C Wizards' Hall
I don't know where to start with this one, but I'll start with the character. That the names Harry and Henry are similar is completely laughable as a source of plagiarism. Harry is a very common name, and is used to show that the protagonist is just an average guy (generally) with nothing in particular to make him special. The red headed best friend is more of a British joke than anything else, cause ginger kids get a lot of stick . The Wizarding School is also laughable, I mean come on, its a common fantasy story type. Evil Wizard threatening to destroy said school is just as common too, coupled with the underpowered protagonist - its basically David and Goliath all over again.

II-D Secret Platform 13
JKR has always found train stations to be romantic places, she said so herself. That she wouldn't include it in her books is absurd. That it harbours a hidden platform (a necessity considering the lack of wizard/muggle interaction) is merely coincidence.

Conclusion
In conclusion, 90% of these peoples' complaints can be put down to either coincidence or such common usage that plagiarism could be levelled on them as well (such as complaining about chanting and potions in regards to witchcraft, HA!). While the remaining 10% does suggest she used ideas from these stories, that can be put down to subconscious memories being brought to the surface (like the designers and the symbols) and used without realising it. I don't know about you, but when I'm reading a fic I get inspired to write another one, like an offshoot of the original where I believe I can do better or take it off in another direction.

In short, its all a coincidence .

Aekiel

P.S. Jesus this is a long post... I need a hobby.

 

The evil, hooked-nose potions teacher who holds a grudge against the protagonist. Yeah. Happens in 9 out of 10 stories.

If you want to brush off similarities that go deeper than just archetypal roles, that's fine.

 

And the cycle continues, check out the "Septimus Heap" series from Angie Sage some times. The first volume was published in 2005 and features a family of poor wizards with seven children (all of whom have green eyes), a misplaced child who learns the truth about her murdered parents on her birthday from a visiting mage (and oh yeah, she's mega-rich/famous if only she could claim it), an impenetrable magic castle that falls to evil as soon as the chief wizard leaves, and of course a formerly dead villian who wants to kill the poor confused child...

Sadly it's better written than the last three Potter books.

 

No it's (they're?) not. Septimus Heap is simplistic and cliche to the point of redefinition. The series is unbelievably predictable. It's directed at small children who think they have balls because they're reading a thick book. Everyone else who's not a dumbass should recognize just how many flaws there are. It has an utterly overused plot, and I'll be damned to find a character that's not flat. However screwed up the last 3 Harry Potter books were, they CANNOT hold a candle to that pile. It's a series, and I'll congratulate anyone who could make it through even book 1, besides those finishing it for the sake of not leaving something half-assed. And, really, I would understand.

 

Never said it wasn't a pile of cliche'd and overused crap, I just said it was better than the last couple canon HP books.

Septimus Heap is (as we should have guessed from the title) a "Heap" but for some reason a lot of people like it. All those things I mentioned above occurred in the first hundred pages of the first book for crying out loud yet people read it. People also read the abortions Rowling has been selling.

I'd point out that the topic was about plagiarism/plot-borrowing. My example is just one of the more obvious of the many people trying to steal HP fans or cash in on a working idea.

 

I'm really impressed that it's taken as long as it has for this sort of thing to start showing up. The series is done and now everyone can take shots at the author.

As to this particular issue my view is simpe: I don't give a crap how close some of Rowling's ideas came to the works of other authors. J.K. Rowling has written a good series of books that I enjoyed reading. That's all that matters. If she had actually been plagiarizing other authors, their publishers and lawyers, would all have long ago filed complaints.

So the woman's made a crap ton of money; big shit. There are a lot of others in the world making just as much if not more money for far more pathetic reasons. Lets take a look at where a lot of those screenwriters in the T.V. and movie industries are getting their ideas.

It's okay though, we'll just all dump on Rowling until she writes her next book that everyone goes and buys.

 

Heh, when I saw the title I expected it to be about the Larry Potter graphic novels.

I've never actually seen them but I did hear about a potential law suit surrounding them when the 3rd or 4th book was released.

Has anyone read these or know more about this particular case?

 

While I think that most of the similarities are likely coincidental, the resemblance to "The Worst Witch" is astonishingly strong.

When I first saw some tv-episodes (in or after 2000) I wondered how long it would take JKR to sue the shit out of them. So many details looked like an all-female Hogwarts.

Then I learned that Jill Murphy published her first book in 1974 and I was and still am astonished that she never tried to sue JKR.

 

Having read two of the books up there, and having seen "The Worst Witch" I can honestly say that while some of the surroundings may be similar, Harry Potter himself, and the rest of the main characters for that matter, aren't anywhere in there. The plots aren't anywhere in any of those books either.

Even if JKR did steal bits of the background, I'm pretty sure it was accidental. As Bioplague said, she's probably read all of those books, but she probably read them a long time ago. She probably had a few ideas from them still sticking in her subconcious when she wrote the books, but that's no reason to call it plagiarism. I would be more shocked if she had done what no fantasy writer has ever done and not incorporated anything from any other story.

 

Is it probable that she came up with several of the same Idea's independently? I've lost count of the times that I've come up with what I thought was an original fanfic idea only to run into it in another story mere weeks later.

 

I think it's all coicidence...she might of got inspirations off from the other author's work but the Harry Potter series in a whole is just too different.


As said, alot of the things mentioned are very common archtypes and shouldn't be of any concern with plagerism. If that was the case, then every horror movie, every 'teen' movie, and every story about vampire's would all be violators of plagerism.

 

Just because there are some obvious similarities between two stories, we can't call it plagiarism. There are lot of ways for that to happen. Maybe both the authors got inspiration for that idea from same source like, a legend, a painting etc. In this wide world, it is not uncommon for people from vastly different areas to come up with same ideas without ever hearing of the other.

Have you heard about Alexander Graham Bell who invented telephone? A few days after he patented the new invention, another guy from some other country came with the same kind of instrument only to find that he was a bit late.

But of course JKR could have been influenced by some of the books she read a while ago, but she won't be remembering that book now. But all it comes down to is, JKR was successful in marketing her book and it was known worldwide. As for other books and authors Bio mentioned, I haven't even heard of them, let alone read it.

 

Another one: Diana Wynne Jones's Charmed Life (1977) had a magical orphan boy sent off to a castle run by a powerful but seemingly absent-minded wizard with a predilection for colorful dressing gowns. The toy soldiers could move on their own! Someone turned into a feline! The main character's first name had an "a" in it!

re: Books of Magic, you'd think people would just accept Gaiman at his word, but I'll second him in saying that comparisons are really superficial. If Tim has a scar I can't see it. His glasses aren't round. The owls in both have the same roots in earlier myths, e.g. Merlin.

Yes, the original miniseries is about a boy with glasses getting told he's a wizard, but... Imagine if Hagrid and three friends in trenchcoats had introduced Harry to magic by taking him on a psychedelic journey through time and space, pontificating all the way, and you've got some idea what it's like. It's thematically closer to The Sword in the Stone than Harry Potter.

The subsequent series (1994-2000) is more action-oriented -- and Tim even has round glasses in some issues: ooh, damning evidence! -- but it bears even less resemblance.

 

lol, even if she did plagiarise it, she fucked it up anyway.

 

I'm in agreement with this:

However, since we're pointing out places where JKR may have got her ideas, I'd put forward Enid Blyton's Malory Towers books.

It's a series based around a girl going off to boarding school and there are many similarities. There is a school-train that takes the students to the school. There are four houses, which are located in towers. The format of the books is the same too.

 

I have no doubt that Rowling stole material from other authors, but hey, so did those other authors. The only reason Rowling is being targeted now is because she's the one who's made the money from these ideas.

I try so hard not to steal from sci fi and fantasy when I'm writing my novels for NaNoWriMo, but it's hard. You can't be 100% original all the time. Most ideas have been penned already...until someone can open a whole new door into something unknown, and the process of exhausting ideas will begin again.

So, yeah, Rowling copied. There's not much to be done about it.

 

I remember hearing about that series of books that used the term 'muggle' almost immediately after I started reading the HP books.

I sympathize with anyone that writes something and then turns around and finds out that a thousand people had similar or even nearly identical ideas. I have a zillion plotbunnies, scenarios and partially finished stories on my hard drive that I've never uploaded anywhere. They are FULL of stuff that I came up with on my own but later read in other fics. Some of those ideas have been used so much that they have become well known cliches.

(The really annoying shit is when I write something completely fucked up and bizarre and someone still comes up with something so close, I could swear they were reading over my shoulder as I type.)

Oh well. They say there is nothing new under the sun.