Critical response
The Casual Vacancy received mixed reviews. Lev Grossman for Time wrote in a positive review, "It's a big, ambitious, brilliant, profane, funny, deeply upsetting and magnificently eloquent novel of contemporary England, rich with literary intelligence and entirely bereft of bullshit."[13] The Wall Street Journal wrote "Once you get your Mileses and Simonses straight and events begin to unfurl, it becomes a positively propulsive read. 'The Casual Vacancy' may not be George Eliot, but it's J.K. Rowling; and that's pretty good."[14] The Guardian wrote, "The Casual Vacancy is no masterpiece, but it's not bad at all: intelligent, workmanlike, and often funny."[15] The Economist opined, "This is a novel of insight and skill, deftly drawn and, at the end, cleverly pulled together. It plays to her strengths as a storyteller."[16] David Robinson of The Scotsman praised the novel, saying, "It is far grittier, bleaker (and, occasionally, funnier) than I had expected, and—the acid test—I suspect it would do well even if its author's name weren't J.K. Rowling."[17] The Telegraph lauded the novel as well, writing, "One marvels at the skill with which Rowling weaves such vivid characters in and out of each other's lives, rendering them so complex and viscerally believable that one finds oneself caring for the worst of them."[18] Further positive reviews have come from reviewers for the Associated Press, Express.co.uk, The Daily Mirror, The Kansas City Star, The New Zealand Herald and the Daily Beast, the latter remarked that the book was a "page turner."[19][20][21][22][23][24]
The New York Times' Michiko Kakutani panned the novel, comparing it unfavourably to Rowling's Harry Potter series and saying, "We do not come away feeling that we know the back stories of the 'Vacancy' characters in intimate detail the way we did with Harry and his friends and enemies, nor do we finish the novel with a visceral knowledge of how their pasts—and their families' pasts—have informed their present lives."[25] The Los Angeles Times criticised the book, stating that it "fails to conjure Harry Potter's magic."[26] The Daily Telegraph maintained the novel was humorous but said "The novel pretty much explodes towards the end, losing shape in its fury at the dirty, unfair England that we Muggles have made for ourselves. It's like The Archers on amyl nitrate."[27] The Times said "The difficulty, in this fat novel, is the difference between the reader's level of interest in a wholly invented world, such as Harry Potter's, and the world we're stuck with. Rowling has a sharp eye for vivid details, and there are passages of very good writing in this book... But her fictions have little shadow in them."[28]
Sales, awards and honours
Within hours of the book's release, it had reached Number 1 position on the Amazon Book Chart in the United States. It was the second biggest adult opening of all time in the United Kingdom, falling short of Dan Brown's 2009 novel, The Lost Symbol, which sold 550,946 copies. It also fell short of Rowling's last release, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, that sold 2.6 million copies and became the fastest-selling book in history.[29] It became the 15th best-selling book of 2012 during its first week of release.[2] Little, Brown and Company has announced that within the first three weeks the book's total sales had topped one million copies in English in all formats across all territories, including the US and the UK.[30]
The book won the Best Fiction category in the Goodreads Choice Awards 2012.
Portrayal of Sikhism
A Sikh family plays an important part in the novel, and the description of the character Sukhvinder sparked some controversy amongst followers of the Sikh faith. Avtar Singh Makkar, the head of India's Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, commented that Rowling's book would be examined by the scrutiny board of SGPC for anything objectionable.[31] Rowling stated that she admires the Sikh religion and had done a vast amount of research on Sikhism.[32] Other members of the Sikh community appreciated the fact that Rowling portrayed Sikhs and Sikhism in a favourable light and actually draws attention to discriminations faced by Sikhs.[33]
