I read the books this year because I wanted to feel pain, basically, and I wanted to be justified in disliking Harry Potter. I was not disappointed. However, I still don't understand how the fuck the end of the book worked. It was so harebrained and convoluted and sloppy as fuck that I don't know what actually happened. Am I stupid or was it a bad ending? And what the fuck happened? How did they actually kill Voldemort?
In order to destroy a horcrux, it has to be obliterated in such a way that it could never be brought back. If the horcrux is a living thing, you can just kill it by any method because magic can't bring the dead back to life. So if Voldemort had killed Harry, he would have destroyed the unintentional horcrux he created.
I think technically speaking he did kill Harry, but the remnant of Lily's protection saved him from dying all the way, and that's what caused him to meet Dumbledore in limbo or wherever.
I think it's fair to say that this plot point was kind of contrived and not really set up in universe, and although the specific magic that allowed it wasn't set up, it was a recurring plot point throughout the entire series that Harry never asked to be the chosen one and didn't like it, so the moment with Dumbledore represented him being "reborn" as a hero by choice rather than by random chance.
Honestly I don't get why every leftist wants me to hate the Harry Potter books. JK Rowling may be a piece of shit, but that has literally nothing to do with the content of the books. It doesn't matter if you're the most despicable Nazi ever to Hitler, if you write a book that captures the imagination of millions of kids and doesn't contain your ideology in it, you've written a good book. Hating everything associated with someone doesn't mean you hate them more.
edit: ok, I don't mean the book has to "not contain your ideology," that's impossible. What I mean is it has to not serve as a vehicle for your ideology, and it has to not contain so many problematic themes as to set it apart from other media in the same cultural context, which I believe applies to the HP series. I acknowledge the serious flaws in the books, but I think they should be looked at completely ignoring Rowling's stated political views, which people clearly are not doing.
You're not wrong about a lot of the hatred of the books being overblown, but they ABSOLUTELY contain Rowling's ideology in them
b a n k i n g g o b l i n s
Not to mention that supporting her books helps to fund her ideology-pushing and gives her a louder voice.
Oh hey, someone named for a children's book series I really enjoyed as a kid.
Just now realizing I never actually finished Keys to the Kingdom. Or Pendragon, now that I think about it
Well, every work of art contains some of the ideology of the artist. That was an overstatement.
But if you ignore Rowling's real world actions, the books aren't that problematic as media from that time period goes. It's more in hindsight that we can make connections between some of the casual stereotyping in the books and the political views of the author.
It's not just the stereotypes. Voldemort defeating himself because he Broke The Rules is peak liberal ideology
Her book is neoliberal as fuck though
Sure, but so is most media. The Lion King is pro absolutist monarchy, and it's still a good movie.
Well yes, but that wasn't the point you were making, at least I thought. You said that what made the book good was that it captured the imagination of millions of kids and it doesn't contain your ideology. I was saying it does contain her ideology, which is why there was no real revolution or anything in it, and Voldemort lost on a technicality.
Yeah I kinda put my point wrong in that comment, I put an edit at the end since then.
I think Harry survived because the elder wand refused to kill him. The point of the deathly hallows was to allow their owners to cheat death after all.