petermarcus: (Default)
petermarcus ([personal profile] petermarcus) wrote2003-01-15 12:42 pm
  • Add Memory
  • Share This Entry

(no subject)

Harry Potter V due out June 21st:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/books/01/15/new.potter/index.html

Sounds like this one will be a good one!

Interesting part of the article, though, and something I'm wondering -- the picture caption describes JK Rowling as "Master of the Potter series"

Shouldn't that be "Mistress of the Potter series"? Or is master/mistress going the way of actor/actress and being neutralized? I'm all for neutralization, but the formality of the term kinda threw me.
Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[identity profile] cisforcorrie.livejournal.com 2003-01-15 10:36 am (UTC)(link)
The actor/actress thing has always been a pet peeve of mine. Like a female performer has to refer to herself as an 'actor' to be taken seriously.

corrie

[identity profile] petermarcus.livejournal.com 2003-01-15 10:50 am (UTC)(link)
I dunno -- to me I can see it for a lot of industries. Actor, I'm not sure about -- if they still have awards for "Best Male Actor" and "Best Female Actor" then changing the name doesn't make it equal, does it? Still, I kinda like actor for both. It beats things like "Anchorperson" and "Mail Carrier" where the entire term is changed.

On the other hand, there are traditional, formal terms that will never be changed. King Elizabeth II? Master/mistress seems to be too formal to neutralize. What would all the Doms/Subs do?

Re:

[identity profile] cisforcorrie.livejournal.com 2003-01-15 11:14 am (UTC)(link)
Here in Canada, the acting awards are given out to best female and best male actor, which seems nonsensical to me, I guess if I ever win one, I'll have to make some impassioned speech.

Mistress just sounds so much more baaaaaddddd ass than master, I think.



c

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only