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?
Been a long time since I read but IIRC:
This shit was gripping when you were younger but if you step back and view the series with a wider critical eye it has a lot of gaping problems. Rowling basically introduced several incredibly important McGuffins crucial for resolving the entire series in the last book and retroactively tied them in with earlier events and foreshadowing. Voldemort's final defeat was certainly thematically appropriate (he was so arrogant and unable to comprehend he was mortal he refused to listen to an honest attempt to warn him he was wrong) but Harry basically wins on a technicality. A better series, if it really wanted to end this way, would have spent a lot of time in the series setting up these McGuffins and the ambiguity of the language regarding ownership of the McGuffin. But it's thrown in at the last minute like an Ass Pull.
The love protection magic seeming like such a rare and little known about thing always made me think that the HP universe was full of unfeeling callous lizard people for whom the thought of sacrificing themselves for others would never even cross their minds. With all the evil wizards running around murdering innocent people you'd think there'd be way more cases of people having the instakill spell bounce off them just by sheer probability. Then again, the series is set in Britain
Right that seems like such a fucking gaping loophole. Out of the thousands that Voldemort killed not a single one actually loved their child until the Potters?
It’s this elitist fantasy where even love is a commodity able to be enjoyed by a select few “good and smart” people of the caliber of the Potters. Disgusting
To be far these are English people we're talking about.
deleted by creator
On the other hand, Harry's self-sacrifice near the end of the last book makes all the good guys immune to Voldemort's goons, which shows it doesn't have to be a parent laying down their lives for their children and that the scope of the magical protection is quite large
I think your view of wizard sociopathy is well placed, and that in a better setting, they would all absolutely view non-wizards as lesser in the ways they view magical creatures. This is better done in the netflix Sabrina show IMO.
lmao
Wait so, holy shit, no wonder it didn't make any fucking sense to me. None of it was defined beforehand and it was revealed like all of her other sudden twists that explained everything but actually were held together with glue and spit in other plots of the other books too. The entire series is just fucking M. Night Shyamalan all the way the fuck down.
Alan Moore said that Rowling used ill-defined magical principles but you laid out precisely why he said that. He was written off as a crank for saying it, but he's absolutely correct.
The seventh book very obviously ran into the dilemma of "oh god oh fuck i have so many loose ends and my protagonists are in such deep shit there is no way i can tie this all together". AKA the Kojima/Lost dilemma. Deathly Hallows was an admirable effort but the cracks in foundation are extremely visible
deleted by creator
This happens when I jerk off a lot
Yes. After rewatching the fourth movie, it’s crazy that Voldemort and Barty Jr contrive this whole plan of kidnapping Harry that involves Barty directly kidnapping Moody, a trained Auror and defense against the dark arts professor, and then disguising himself as Moody for an entire year while taking over his professor job. Then over the course of the year cleverly manipulating people in order to get Harry to win the tournament and grab the cup which teleports him to Voldemort. That sounds like a Count Olaf plan and not a plan that comes from a dangerous wizard. If they could kidnap Moody, they could just kidnap Harry, who is just a kid and living with muggles. If they could turn the trophy into a portkey, they could turn lots of things into portkeys. Like his toothbrush. And in that case, he wouldn’t be carrying his wand with him which allows him to escape Voldemort. I love the series though so maybe I’m a lib.
deleted by creator
but in 7th grade this was pretty awesome
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
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
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
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.
The "love protection spell" at the end was Harry Potter bluffing. If I remember correctly, after Neville showed his badassedness, Harry slipped on the invisibility cloak and ran through the battlefield casting shielding/reflecting spells while he went looking for Voldemorte and Ron and Hemione.
I'm pretty sure you're not remembering correctly, the love protection thing was real.
There's what he said when he faced up against voldemort....
and then there's what he did.
And that's just from some quick googling. Pretty sure there were a couple more shield charms in between the two. Harry may have been protected by the Love spell, like during the crucio stuff, but the thing protecting his friends at the end was him.
I thought it was both, like he was protecting them AND they were shielded from all the Death Eaters, but maybe he didn't realize in the moment that he didn't need top protect them. Because why would Harry lie there? To psych Voldemort out? He's about to die anyway because of the Elder Wand owner thing. IDK, it's sloppy writing on Rowling's part, some editor needed to tell her that it wasn't clear at that part.
lmao, no argument there.
Finally I can confidently state i'm not the biggest Lib here
This is garbage. People like this stuff?
I actually defend the Harry Potter series a lot because it was very much a kind of formative literary experience you grew up with. Like, a cultural phenomenon you had to experience in person to really understand its immense popularity. And not only that, but the books matured with you. When you were hitting puberty and experiencing things like death, depression, and sexual tension for the first time, the later books were addressing those themes in detail. That's the reason the series' quality tends to be overblown - peoples' connections to it aren't that it was incredible genre fiction but that it forms an intense emotional connection to them in their memories. For a lot of people, the Harry Potter series was what got them into reading as a kid.
My grandmother and aunt gifted me the first four books when I was like 8. I kind of ignored them for a while (I was more of a Civil War history nerd then like Matt) but my dad started reading them to my sister and I aloud before bed. Those are probably the most intimate emotional memories I have of my father. We did that for six books, even up to when we were in high school. It basically became a ritual. When the seventh book came out we were on vacation in the boonies but still made a special trip to town to buy a copy day of. I proceeded to lock myself in my room for three straight days in order to read it cover to cover. This was basically the culmination of a decade of anticipation and it really did pay off at the time.
There's a lot of positive and quality aspects to those books. But they are nowhere near perfect.
:heart-sickle:
Also the setting of a school where all the students know each other and their teachers over seven years is super nostalgic because I went to a small school for seven years and all the friendly/funny/mean interactions between characters reminds me of times I had with the people at my school. My university is way too big to get the same sense of community. I hope when the revolution comes we can find a way to build small communities again instead of everyone being isolated in their suburban homes and only making connections with family and a few friends.
They're kids books. The worst thing that ever happened to the Harry Potter series was becoming a phenomenon and the people who read it as kids continuing to latch onto it as a neotonous soother as adults. I read plenty of kids books as a kid that don't "hold up" as an adult reader (like Maniac Magee or Holes or stuff like that). They don't hold up because they're meant for children. It's hard to completely blame all these adult fans of Harry Potter because between JK Rowling and Hollywood they were never given a second of breathing time away from this kids series to mature and reflect, Harry Potter kept releasing new films, a play, a different film series, and so on.
chapo.chat is a Holes slander free zone, please cease and desist
We must have our Holes, but likewise our Harry Potters.
Oh wait I just forgot you left off how Harry's able to fake being dead. His coded-as-Nazi nemesis' parents are there, and the mom comes over to check that he's REALLY dead. She asks Harry if her son is alive and when he says yes, she lies to Voldemort.
Edit: also also, in her fucking shitty Cursed Child play where someone tries to revive Voldemort, she accidentally makes the case why reconciliation doesn't necessarily work and why it's important to destroy a monarchy to the root but in her neoliberal imagination it's just a whoopsie daisy, that ain't too good kinda thing.
Gahhh.
Basically, go read Wheel of Time instead. Got it.
Or Discworld, it rocks the shit out of a lot of shit I've read
Pratchett is legitimately one of the best authors of the modern era IMO. The sheer amount of fucking layers, both in the plots, characterizations, and puns that he managed to weave together into a coherent whole is just ridiculous.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Jordan wrote most of the prophecies the series is built around in the first 3-4 books. There were plot twists that happened after he died that he had come up with twenty years earlier. I'm not sure there's a better architect when it comes to world building in the genre, possibly except Brandon Sanderson.