the system is inherently good and if a bad person gets into power, that’s just an aberration and the system will self-correct.
That's not even the arc of the first four books. Rowling's writing is genuinely good early on, at least from an ideological perspective. The theme of the novels is that you're coming up in a corrupt system with a ton of historical baggage. You can't trust your elders to take care of you. You can't trust the system to work in your favor. All you can trust are your comrades, many of whom may come from unexpected places.
Book 3 is borderline Revolutionary. The climax of the story is Harry coming to terms with his parents being gone. The past is immutable. There are no guardian angels. You are your only savior, and only if you are clear eyed and courageous enough to stand up for yourself. The book is overflowing with anti-racism, radicalization, and collective action.
Then the books begin to slide off a cliff into mass market glop, coincidentally just as Rowling is really hitting the big time and get novels start getting that ghostwritten feel.
Harry Potter is a liberalization pipeline. It slowly transforms from a childhood fantasy of kids versus evil into a Marvel-ized Establishment versus The Bad Guys. And it takes the readers along for the ride.
I mean, it was already pretty consumerist from the start. Like, how does every book begin, after the Dursleys but before Hogwarts? It begins with Harry going on a shopping spree, often seeing many products that he won't even buy (but have plenty of merchandising potential, nudge nudge, wink wink, publishers). It's also probably the only piece of fantasy outside of RPGs in which a wizard obtains their magical device by buying it, and that is completely played straight.
It begins with Harry going on a shopping spree, often seeing many products that he won’t even buy (but have plenty of merchandising potential, nudge nudge, wink wink, publishers).
The first book uses the Wizarding Marketplace as a device for world building, since its an excuse for Harry to interact with people he wouldn't meet at the school. It also sets up the class composition of the main characters and introduces antagonists.
The second book extends on the trope to introduce more new characters (Doby, most notably), to introduce the journal as a plot device, and to parallel the conclusion.
The consumerist angle, particularly early on, is all social parallels with existing English consumerism. Collectible cards and novelty chocolates are hardly a HP invention and the way they malfunction or disappoint is as much a critique of consumerism as a method of it. I particularly liked Book 4, at the stadium, when they get showered with Fool's Gold coins. The cynicism was nearly tangible.
It’s also probably the only piece of fantasy outside of RPGs in which a wizard obtains their magical device by buying it, and that is completely played straight.
It's a curious commentary on class. Powerful Wizards get their wands lovingly crafted and maintained by a premier wandmaker. Schlub wizards have to mend their hand me down wands with masking tape. Good sports teams get the best gear. Struggling teams get whatever is at the back of the bin.
Money Buys Success as a parallel to the real world makes this a useful leftist critique.
It isn't until Book 7 and the Deathly Hallows that you get magic items vested by Adventurous Questing rather than by birthright or by having the right friends.
It isn’t until Book 7 and the Deathly Hallows that you get magic items vested by Adventurous Questing rather than by birthright or by having the right friends.
That's when I turned off the movie. They found the secret platform, got on the train, arrived at the school and then "It's time to go shopping, Harry!" I was like, uh where's he getting the money from. "Why, you go to The Bank, of course!"
I'm like, YOU HAVE TO WORK TO PUT THE FUCKING MONEY IN THERE MORON, BANKS AREN'T SOME QUEST LOCATION YOU VISIT AND THEY FILL UP YOUR BAG WITH CASH. But no, of course, it's his parents' money. Yes, because he is The Chosen One. Turned it off right there and never looked back to any Harry Potter media since. Never read a book, and 30 minutes in to the first movie.
A couple of books later he visits the bank with his best friends' family who have semi-adopted him and whose main defining trait is that they're always poor and struggling to make ends meet.
Harry watches as the mom visits the family's almost empty vault to scrounge up the few coins left in the corners, then they visit the Potter vault which he is the sole heir of and it looks like Scrooge McDuck's Money Bin
I know the vibe you're talking about, but I had always interpreted it as instead Rowling trying to portray childhood innocence and wonder versus how adults are stuck in their ways. I'd have to read them again to see what you're talking about.
The later books took that inevitable shift because Rowling tried to cater to an audience growing into their teenage and adult years. So there are more adult themes like romance, politics, violence, etc. And I'd argue those showcase Rowling's inherent ideology better, because they relate more to real world ideology. The earlier books do seem more progressively minded, for instance the Durselys are roundly mocked and are portrayed as stuffy Daily Mail readers. Some of the adult wizards are portrayed as stuffy, uptight and stubborn in the other direction.
There's definitely some kind of vibe that Hogwarts doesn't take the safety of the students seriously enough. And how many adult wizards, despite being supposedly educated and more enlightened than muggles, fall victim to superstition and paranoia like how they can't say Voldemort's name. So Harry often presents himself as audience surrogate who can see through the stuck ways of both the muggles and the wizards, since he exists in both realms. So there's where I could see what you mean, Harry exists initially as an innocent child slowly seeing the problems of both realities he's within, only finding comfort with his friends.
’d have to read them again to see what you’re talking about.
Christ, don't go that far.
So Harry often presents himself as audience surrogate who can see through the stuck ways of both the muggles and the wizards, since he exists in both realms.
He's as much a narrative framing device as a character. Hermione and Ron are far better written as characters, with Harry being more of a neutral observer.
That's also why the conclusions of each book seem so bland. Harry Wins is the foregone conclusion of each volume. The stories are far more about the journey than the destination.
There’s definitely some kind of vibe that Hogwarts doesn’t take the safety of the students seriously enough.
That's not part of any intended deeper message, the Wizarding World was just portrayed as a comically grim place and the wizards as kinda callous assholes early on
Then the series tried to develop some more serious drama and you were supposed to take the world more seriously
Yeah, sometimes there's this slightly edgy Tim Burton/Addams Family/etc permanent PG-13 Halloween mode going on, but then the wizards are also basically just Good Christians
I’d have to read them again to see what you’re talking about.
Or, hear me out - read absolutely anything else.
The Broken Earth trilogy by NK Jemisin is incredible, highly recommend.
The first three Red Rising books are also a complete trilogy story that's got all the heroics of Star Wars or Harry Potter but is actually really good and doesn't portray one loser wanna-be-cop as the savoir of a status quo, it's a story about an actual revolution and the actual overthrow of an evil society. And the audiobook narrator has the sexiest Irish accent.
I'll take your word on this, because admittedly I haven't read any of the books, my knowledge is all from second hand sources, especially Shaun's great video :shrug-outta-hecks:
That's not even the arc of the first four books. Rowling's writing is genuinely good early on, at least from an ideological perspective. The theme of the novels is that you're coming up in a corrupt system with a ton of historical baggage. You can't trust your elders to take care of you. You can't trust the system to work in your favor. All you can trust are your comrades, many of whom may come from unexpected places.
Book 3 is borderline Revolutionary. The climax of the story is Harry coming to terms with his parents being gone. The past is immutable. There are no guardian angels. You are your only savior, and only if you are clear eyed and courageous enough to stand up for yourself. The book is overflowing with anti-racism, radicalization, and collective action.
Then the books begin to slide off a cliff into mass market glop, coincidentally just as Rowling is really hitting the big time and get novels start getting that ghostwritten feel.
Harry Potter is a liberalization pipeline. It slowly transforms from a childhood fantasy of kids versus evil into a Marvel-ized Establishment versus The Bad Guys. And it takes the readers along for the ride.
I mean, it was already pretty consumerist from the start. Like, how does every book begin, after the Dursleys but before Hogwarts? It begins with Harry going on a shopping spree, often seeing many products that he won't even buy (but have plenty of merchandising potential, nudge nudge, wink wink, publishers). It's also probably the only piece of fantasy outside of RPGs in which a wizard obtains their magical device by buying it, and that is completely played straight.
The first book uses the Wizarding Marketplace as a device for world building, since its an excuse for Harry to interact with people he wouldn't meet at the school. It also sets up the class composition of the main characters and introduces antagonists.
The second book extends on the trope to introduce more new characters (Doby, most notably), to introduce the journal as a plot device, and to parallel the conclusion.
The consumerist angle, particularly early on, is all social parallels with existing English consumerism. Collectible cards and novelty chocolates are hardly a HP invention and the way they malfunction or disappoint is as much a critique of consumerism as a method of it. I particularly liked Book 4, at the stadium, when they get showered with Fool's Gold coins. The cynicism was nearly tangible.
It's a curious commentary on class. Powerful Wizards get their wands lovingly crafted and maintained by a premier wandmaker. Schlub wizards have to mend their hand me down wands with masking tape. Good sports teams get the best gear. Struggling teams get whatever is at the back of the bin.
Money Buys Success as a parallel to the real world makes this a useful leftist critique.
It isn't until Book 7 and the Deathly Hallows that you get magic items vested by Adventurous Questing rather than by birthright or by having the right friends.
That's when I turned off the movie. They found the secret platform, got on the train, arrived at the school and then "It's time to go shopping, Harry!" I was like, uh where's he getting the money from. "Why, you go to The Bank, of course!"
I'm like, YOU HAVE TO WORK TO PUT THE FUCKING MONEY IN THERE MORON, BANKS AREN'T SOME QUEST LOCATION YOU VISIT AND THEY FILL UP YOUR BAG WITH CASH. But no, of course, it's his parents' money. Yes, because he is The Chosen One. Turned it off right there and never looked back to any Harry Potter media since. Never read a book, and 30 minutes in to the first movie.
A couple of books later he visits the bank with his best friends' family who have semi-adopted him and whose main defining trait is that they're always poor and struggling to make ends meet.
Harry watches as the mom visits the family's almost empty vault to scrounge up the few coins left in the corners, then they visit the Potter vault which he is the sole heir of and it looks like Scrooge McDuck's Money Bin
I know the vibe you're talking about, but I had always interpreted it as instead Rowling trying to portray childhood innocence and wonder versus how adults are stuck in their ways. I'd have to read them again to see what you're talking about.
The later books took that inevitable shift because Rowling tried to cater to an audience growing into their teenage and adult years. So there are more adult themes like romance, politics, violence, etc. And I'd argue those showcase Rowling's inherent ideology better, because they relate more to real world ideology. The earlier books do seem more progressively minded, for instance the Durselys are roundly mocked and are portrayed as stuffy Daily Mail readers. Some of the adult wizards are portrayed as stuffy, uptight and stubborn in the other direction.
There's definitely some kind of vibe that Hogwarts doesn't take the safety of the students seriously enough. And how many adult wizards, despite being supposedly educated and more enlightened than muggles, fall victim to superstition and paranoia like how they can't say Voldemort's name. So Harry often presents himself as audience surrogate who can see through the stuck ways of both the muggles and the wizards, since he exists in both realms. So there's where I could see what you mean, Harry exists initially as an innocent child slowly seeing the problems of both realities he's within, only finding comfort with his friends.
Christ, don't go that far.
He's as much a narrative framing device as a character. Hermione and Ron are far better written as characters, with Harry being more of a neutral observer.
That's also why the conclusions of each book seem so bland. Harry Wins is the foregone conclusion of each volume. The stories are far more about the journey than the destination.
That's not part of any intended deeper message, the Wizarding World was just portrayed as a comically grim place and the wizards as kinda callous assholes early on
Then the series tried to develop some more serious drama and you were supposed to take the world more seriously
I remember in the first or second book when the janitor complains he's not allowed to chain students to the ceiling as punishment anymore.
Yeah, sometimes there's this slightly edgy Tim Burton/Addams Family/etc permanent PG-13 Halloween mode going on, but then the wizards are also basically just Good Christians
Or, hear me out - read absolutely anything else.
The Broken Earth trilogy by NK Jemisin is incredible, highly recommend.
The first three Red Rising books are also a complete trilogy story that's got all the heroics of Star Wars or Harry Potter but is actually really good and doesn't portray one loser wanna-be-cop as the savoir of a status quo, it's a story about an actual revolution and the actual overthrow of an evil society. And the audiobook narrator has the sexiest Irish accent.
Hell yeah always nice to meet a fellow Howler
I'll take your word on this, because admittedly I haven't read any of the books, my knowledge is all from second hand sources, especially Shaun's great video :shrug-outta-hecks:
It's currently one of my sleep listening videos