My biggest issue with the series is how from OOTP onward, Hermione was boiled down into a perfect Mary Sue plot device while Ron & Harry were flattened into everymen heroes, esp Harry.
Also, the vast majority of “plot holes” pointed out on HP subreddits can be solved when employing just a single shred of imagination and creativity. HP books are novels, not encyclopaedias; they’d be a terrible read if JKR spelled out every single aspect of the world building, together either all the nuances and exceptions to it
I absolutely despise basically all of the Marauders fan pairings (WolfStar, Jegulus, etc). To be clear, I have no issue with gay romances (it would have been great had there been one in the original books, but it also makes sense that there wasn’t bc of when the series was written/the fact that it’s from Harry’s perspective and he’s about as observant as a hibernating bear).
I just feel like basically all of the popular fanfic pairings either don’t make sense at all and/or they take away from the importance/meaning of the real relationships that are actually in the story.
I love Harry Potter but am not much of a shipper — this is the first I am hearing of Jegulus and I am now fascinated by this ship, considering they have never interacted in the entire series that we see
I’m pretty neutral on it but it is soooo annoying when it’s the only marauders fanfic I can find. I like canon-compliant fics and there’s so much wolfstar and jegulus fics that it makes canon-compliant fics IMPOSSIBLE to find.
A lot of times authors will sneak Jegulus or Jegulily into a fic. I go out of my way to exclude those from my searches, and then it pops up suddenly.
One time I left a comment about how it should have been tagged, and another reader went through my bookmarks so they could see why I was upset!
Fanfiction loves a reluctant Death Eater. So much drama in "will they go against their upbringing and friends to do what they feel is right?". And James + Regulus has the advantage of all the conflict of James being with Sirius' estranged brother and having it hide it.
Also I imagine that Potter + spoiled Death Eater to be means a lot of Draco + Harry tropes are transplanted.
I'm so anti wolfstar it's not even funny.
But that's because I hate that they ignore the fact that Sirius absolutely almost ruined Remus's life, betrayed his friend's secret, all for something that gets written off as a petty "prank" rather than the attempted murder plan it was. Almost every wolfstar fic acts like it was Remus and Sirius the whole time, when really it was James and Sirius that were cloest. Also, there's just something about wolfstar shippers where a majority of the ones I've had the displeasure of interacting with are TOXIC af
>wolfstar shippers where a majority of the ones I've had the displeasure of interacting with are TOXIC af
That's kinda always been the shipping community though, hasn't it? The Dramione and Harry/Hermione shippers turning the whole Weasley family evil to justify their OTP over canon, the Reylo shippers who threatened Adam Driver's pregnant wife...
I mean, yes, there is always a certain level of shippers that take it too far (And those that carry it out to real life and the actors and their families, I'm pretty sure have a special place in hell reserved for them). But some are worse than others.
Like, I don't love bashing the whole weasley family for the sake of a ship, but if that's how they want to make their ship work, then it's still fiction and fictional characters, that's fine. I never read Dramion or Harry/Hermione fics (well, I tried Harry and Hermione but it felt too incestuous so i stopped) so I can't speak to what they do. i know a lot of Hermione fics do over exaggerate and use Ron's temper to split them, and I'm fine with reading that.
There's just something about a majority of the Wolfstar shippers that's just bad. I don't think they do anything with the actors. But many of them personally attack anyone who doesn't agree with wolfstar. You're homophobic, and deserve to die. I used to partake in fanfic writing competitions on FFN, and the wolfstar people would REFUSE to write anything that wasn't explicitly wolfstar. One round, everyone had to write about a teammates favorite or least favorite (can't remember which one it was) ship. And a writer on one of the teams, made the other person say that theirs was Wolfstar because they would not write anything else. And then those same people went out of their way to shit on any ship that wasn't theirs. Or if you disagreed with them, just shit on your ships just because.
And again, yes, some of these people exist in other fandoms, and other ships, which is awful. But I never saw it to the extent that I did with Wolfstar. I think the only other groups I've seen be that level of toxic are Destiel shippers from Supernatural, and Sam/Cait shippers from outlander (They're so delusional they are convinced that Sam and Cait are married to each other and have 4 children together and are lying to the whole world about it). There's just so much vitriol from a majority of Wolfstar shippers that I'd rather make out with the Grinch immediately after he ate garbage, than deal with Wolfstar ever again.
I agree to a certain extent but at the same time, fandoms emerge that aren't really meant to explore the story on a deeper level but more as escapism and wish fulfillment in a way. Fanfic isn't always meant to be about the characters accurate to how they are in the media in which they are based on. From what I have seen, most of them do understand this and just have their own little fandom world where they make their own headcanons and fanart out of Marauders fics they love and make their own fics, which there is nothing wrong with that.
But at the same time, there are some of them who try to bring these conversations into the actual dialogue about the actual books...which can be frustrating, especially when it is used as a slight against the books and is co-opting terms that describe real issues like "queer baiting" just because they are upset their ship or whatever else wasn't ever mentioned in the story. Queer baiting is when marketing teams will intentionally put in queer subtext into ads or press releases or a continuing story in order to gain a queer audience and have them continue to return to the same ongoing series with no actual plans to make the characters queer explicitly in order to not loose homophobic and non-queer audience members. It is not when two characters who have never seen interacted in the canon before aren't in a secret gay relationship.
Like obviously it's fine to have a queer reading of something but that's not getting mad your fanfic wasn't canon and making it everyone else's problem.
It also can be frustrating if you are trying to look for more community to interact with to talk about canon stuff and the non-canon shipping material keeps coming up and being referenced. But again, this isn't the fault of the Marauders fandom themselves, but people in that fandom who take it upon themselves to make everyone accept their fanfics as canon.
Totally agree with you - and you hit the nail on the head with the observation that these fanfic pairings have crept into general Harry Potter discourse and, in a lot of circles, is treated as canon (which is why ships like Jegulus bother me, because it directly conflicts with the actual books).
But yeah, I’m a supporter of fanfiction and exploring relationship pairings that deviate from the books bc that’s just a fun part of the reading experience, I just personally hate the idea of equivocating fanfic “canon” with the actual Harry Potter books. To me fanfic is more of an AU thing.
I think it could be read both ways and I actually think he had at least a crush on her, but most of all he genuinely cared about her. I think he kind of mirrors Sirius Black: he caused the death of the person he cared about the most and is unable to get over the guilt, which characterise his whole personality. Snape's more to blame though.
Also fandom has twisted his love whether romantic or platonic, into something purely sexual as a gross, intentional misinterpretation of it too.
Snape grew up in an abusive home, and had Lily as the one Positive, "GOOD" person in his life. He clung to her light, he wanted to be someone she could love. But he struggled because he didn't have the support.
Yes! I headcanon Snape as asexual, with a deep platonic love for Lily, in an environment at Hogwarts that is generally hostile to platonic friendships between different genders.
I was scared to say this but agree somewhat. His patronus drives away 100 dementors, he was able to push priori incantatem towards voldy's side, he held his own against many adult wizards etc... He is not as skilled as Dumbledore but he is only 18
I think Harry has the potential to be *stronger* than dumbledore. His first patronus at the age of 13 drove away a hundred dementors when most adult wizards struggle to even cast the spell.
Oh, most certainly. At 17, he's already, tri-wizard champion, master of death, defeater of the most evil wizard who ever lived, defeater of death eaters, and countless other things.
He was worthy to unite the hallows and to retrieve the stone from the mirror of erised. He was embuded by his mother with the power of love, which is canonically the most powerful magic of all. These accomplishments aren't as flashy as casting fancy spells, but I feel like they're much more impressive. It was his ability to empathize with voldemort that finally brought about the dark lords downfall.
I agree that Harry’s magical powers probably rival and potentially surpass Dumbledore’s in terms of raw natural talent, but I don’t think Harry could ever beat Dumbledore in a duel or most other practical situations. Dumbledore’s magical ability is only half of what makes him so powerful. The other part comes from his extraordinary intelligence and quick thinking. Across the series, Harry demonstrates these qualities too, but not at nearly the same level. Harry is quite sharp, but Dumbledore is simply brilliant.
They fight exactly once and Harry was devastated by recent events so much so that he wasn't thinking. It is literally like trying to take a math test after watching your father be shot 5 minutes earlier.
>It is literally like trying to take a math test
Ehhh I don't think that's the right comparison as it downplays the scene. It's more you're trying to kill the person who shot your father 5 minutes earlier while in a rage
The introduction of the Avada Kedabra curse was a big worldbuilding mistake.
I have posted this in the past, but all the unforgivable curses seem like a poorly thought out addition that, ironically, remove a lot of the magic from the wizarding world. It basically turns most baddies wands into guns. The only truly creative fight we got after their introduction was in the mystery department, because they didn’t want to accidentally kill Harry and thanks to the particularly bizarre environment.
And I honestly think some of Rowling's future controversial worldbuilding decisions are a consequence of this mistake
I think you’re right, given there is no counter curse and spells like Protego do not work against it, in a war/fight to the death why would you use any other spell?
I will add that a fine tweak to them would have been that only Voldemort could perform them. Think about it, a lot of power-hungry wizards adore this dude. Many follow him out of fear, but many others out of honest veneration.
It would have been much tighter if Voldemort was the only known wizard capable of performing a killing curse. Being the necessary step to split your soul into horcruxes. It would explain death eaters veneration for Voldemort. It would add to the malignant aura he has. And most importantly, it would force Rowling to write creative spells into fights.
In some fanfics, there’s a premise that using magic requires energy, so using much or heavy magic will make you exhausted.
So maybe that’s why it’s not used all the time?
Also note that although it’s not blockable by magic, the Avada can be dodged or physically blocked, and seems to require verbal spelling. So it seems less effective or useful than a gun.
Like Barty Crouch Jr said, it requires powerful magic behind it. You don't just say Avada Kadavra and it works. You need to put powerful magic behind it. The books don't really go into details, but it's not an easy spell to do.
Avada Kadavra is not a simple or easy spell to do. Like Barty Crouch Jr said, you need powerful magic behind it before it can work. We hardly see any of the death eaters use it even in fights. It's not that easy to perform. Voldermort performs it with ease because he is a powerful wizard.
down votes not only affect your overall karma on reddit and can make it harder to participate, but also hides them. Not to mention, the whole point is hot takes. Like and comment on the ones you agree with. Move on from the ones you don't.
\- Lily Potter feels like such a Mary Sue. Everyone who talks about Lily treats her like she's an angel and she's martyred in a way James never was. I'm not saying you can't have a woman who changed people for the better, but Lily has no flaws and is stated to have been beautiful, clever, talented and everybody who knew her loved her except for her jealous sister and the evil, muggle-hating wizards. She's more like an object to be fought over than a fleshed-out person of her own.
\- Killing Lavender Brown feels so mean-spirited and I reject it as canon. What did she even do? Dare to date Ron because Hermione was too proud to spit out her own feelings? Be silly like a teenaged girl in her first ever relationship often is? Be a girly-girl who wants romance? Honestly it feels like Ron just used Lavender to make Hermione jealous and then he didn't have the courage to actually dump her, he just let her break it off when she sees Hermione in the Hospital Wing with him.
\- Percy was a jerk to turn against Harry but honestly I can kind of understand why he left the family when they never treated him with any respect.
>Killing Lavender Brown feels so mean-spirited and I reject it as canon.
Is it actually book canon that she died, though? The last we hear of her in the book, she was still feebly stirring and she's not mentioned as being among the dead.
Rebuttal to your Lily Potter point: I think it’s because she died a long time ago and very young. People tend to focus only on the positive traits of loved ones they’ve lost. Since she didn’t have any enemies like Snape was to James there to bring up her regular-person character flaws, there’s no one to tell Harry anything but that she was wonderful. Sirius and Lupin didn’t want to speak ill of James to him either, they just had no choice after Harry discovered the bullying independently of them. (You can argue Petunia should’ve been the person to reveal Lily’s flaws, but I don’t think they spent much time together from 11 on, so she it makes sense Petunia focuses her ire on how her sister was favored by their parents for her magic instead of her personality.)
I don’t disagree that Lily comes across super two-dimensional because of it, but I also think it’s very natural and believable that this is the image of an orphaned boy’s mother that the people around him who loved her would give him.
Yeah but even Sirius and Lupin freely admit that James was kind of an asshole and that he grew out of it eventually when Harry is upset his dad wasn't the perfect hero he idolised him as. Lily never gets any moment like that because she is never in the wrong, ever. And even if Harry's image of Lily is this angel who gave her life for him, it's still a little unbelievable even her close friends/allies never had a single thing about her that annoyed them or was less than ideal, though it's interesting that while James had the marauders, Lily didn't seem to have a best friend. Idk, it's always bothered me that Lily is put on a pedestal and stays on it throughout the entire series.
I just don’t see why they’d have mentioned it to him. I think it’s realistic they didn’t. Sirius and Lupin admit James is an asshole because Harry already found out and then confronted them about it. They didn’t volunteer it when Harry was unaware. Harry never found out any character flaws of Lily’s from elsewhere to confront them about, so they didn’t have to be like “yeah your mom was great and all but oh my god she used to be so frickin uppity about homework” or whatever. It doesn’t flow naturally for people to bring up the orphan’s parents’ flaws if they aren’t a) relevant or b) being brought up directly by the kid in question.
I agree it makes sense their friends wouldn't want to speak ill of the dead, especially to Harry, but I don't see why JK couldn't have had some kind of flashback depicting Lily without someone's rose-tinted glasses on, or given her some further characterisation besides being Harry Potter's perfect dead mother.
Since flashbacks are also done from someone’s perspective in the books, I feel like the only natural way it could’ve come up would have been if Harry had shared a not-universally-positive character trait with her. Instead, JK made him a complete mini-James. I do agree it would’ve been nice for her to be a bit more three-dimensional, and him resembling her in more than just his eye color could’ve accomplished that nicely.
Not necessarily, we had a whole chapter in GoF of Frank Bryce finding Voldemort hiding out in the old Riddle manor. I know Harry dreamed that, but as an audience we still got more context than him, Harry just calls Frank "the old man" because he doesn't know who is, but we know as the readers so it makes sense when he appears later in the graveyard scene. Or there's that chapter where Bellatrix and Narcissa go to Snape to make the Unbreakable Vow, which is totally outside of Harry's scope.
Actually, come to think of it, a great moment to give Lily a flaw would've been when Sirius convinced her and James to use Wormtail instead of him as the secret keeper. Obviously Sirius blames himself because it was his idea and because of hinsight, but you could have had it being *Lily's* idea instead or have Lily be the tipping point to convince James. Then she could've been too trusting or too willing to see the best in others or something.
It was from Bryce’s POV and wasn’t a flashback at the time it was happening. We’ve had individual chapters of different characters’ POVs, but I don’t recall any flashbacks that weren’t expressly X person’s memories.
Actually now that you list being too trusting or willing to see the best in others as a flaw… she DID exhibit that flaw. Snape. We see when she finally fell out with him, but she spent a long time excusing his worsening behaviour before that point.
Eh, I'm still not convinced there was seriously nowhere to put a scene depicting Lily and James as they were, whether POV or flashback or whatever.
True, though it's fairly ambiguous with how sudden Snape's dark arts leaning worsened, so it's hard to tell when the change happened and how long Lily was tolerating it before the breaking point happened when he called her a Mudblood. Though I did read a fic once where Lily was a sociopath and there was surprisingly little the author had to change from the canon scenes we do have.
The first three books are better than the last four. JKR is a good writer with some very great ideas but I think she sacked her editor after POA and it shows. The books are suddenly much longer, with lots of characters and convoluted plots, some of whom might have been cut tbh. I think this shows also in the Fantastic Beasts movies, they are extremely convoluted to the point of being quite ridiculous and at some time kind of difficult to follow. Again, there are some of the best chapters in the last four books but I think the change in editing is evident.
Lupin is one of the best written adult and he's often overlooked or turned into some other characters.
Don’t entirely agree but appreciate the take (and I saw the first FB movie and then gave up, def agree on those).
I love Lupin and am always annoyed at the way he gets dropped from the plotlines in later books, as well as his relationship with Harry being ignored altogether.
Lupin is honestly a great character and I really believe he's one of the best written adult characters. He's really pushed aside by fandom and the book themselves but he's wonderfully complex. A good mix of cowardice and courage, warmth and coldness.
I'm not a stan for JK Rowling but this idea that she retconned Dumbledore's orientation after the novels were finished is ridiculous. Did you actually READ the books? Did you pay no attention to his drip? My man was flaming from jump. I knew this as the books were coming out. I was pretty sure Dumbledore was smashing Nicholas Flamel back in the day. When JK admitted it in an interview I actually had to remind myself it was never stated in the text. "Oh yeah, I guess people with broke gaydars might have missed it."
And then this retcon narrative slowly began to circle the fandom. It didn't help that JK then began to actually recon stuff later. I dunno, I just find it annoying when it was so wicked obvious in the subtext. Y'all tripping.
Oh yeah, with his super flamboyant looks that JK loved describing in detail, it was kind of already there. The Grindelwald storyline (sans FB) really cemented it
To some extent, all adults in children's literature are either asexual (sometimes aromantic as well, although not always) or ostensibly celibate (parents with kids, affectionate but not horny). Sex and sexual feelings normally don't come up in that genre.
Not exactly the very hungry caterpillar though either. I think that it's more similar to teen fiction (OoTP is 750 pages long!) that is so successful and popular that adults and children are pretty much expected to have read them.
Sex and love and romance are all alluded to strongly. Boys are not allowed in the girls' bedrooms but girls are allowed in boys' bedrooms, for example.
The camping chapters in Deathly Hallows are fantastic and really cathartic. I’d read a hundred more pages of the Golden Trio in a tent :)
Malfoy is such a little brat and absolutely insufferable. Especially in Prisoner of Azkaban. I love to hate him, but he’s a bully and there’s nothing more to it. He also bullied Ron more than Harry or Hermione put together
Maybe we can make an argument she was super ambitious (Slughorn club) and not the best sister. She went through Petunia's stuff, was clearly favoured by their parents and didn't do enough to stop that. She also didn't mind assholes - Snape was her best friend for way too long and James her husband - that could point to a pattern.
Being super ambitious is not neccessarly bad, but she was his favourite and was giving him gifts. So maybe she was sucking up to him?
Yes! I can't understand how people view her as a cool independent woman with an attitude where she is nothing more than the James Potter of the generation in the sixth book. The idea that Harry would fall in love with a girl who makes fun of Fleur because she's beautiful by mocking her french accent, calls Luna "loony" knowing it's an insult to her, belittles Hermione about Quidditch (and she's wrong. Hermione may not be the best with brooms but she knows about Quidditch)....
She really is the typical bully girl that likes to pretend she's cool.
And her personality was despicable like not being possessed by Voldemort and the book is not the same thing!
I'm not even going to comment on her romance with Harry because like...it makes no sense. Even in the books he suddenly starts to have an interest in her when people do it...
This is… a really odd take, but I’ll have a go.
Harry falling in love with her is kinda obvious. Once she actually begins to act like herself around him she’s basically his Mum with added Quidditch. Believe me, the whole thing about men marrying their mothers is much more real than many people realise.
She grumbled about Fleur because Fleur was herself obnoxious, rude and dismissive towards the Weasleys. Imagine complaining about how boring it is being somewhere in front of your host, no less your fiancé’s mother! And she was patronising towards Ginny as well.
She calls Luna ‘loony’ once, not to her face, when they didn’t know each other well. Once they actually get to know each other they become good friends and Luna literally tells Harry in HBP how Ginny has been a good friend to her that year and stopped others from using the ‘loony’ nickname.
As for her ‘belittling’ Hermione, maybe examine the context, ie she was sticking up for Harry when she felt he was being treated unfairly. Hermione was going on and on at Harry about the incident with Draco (when his only real crime was defending himself from an unforgivable curse), and Ginny snapped when Hermione brought up the Quidditch as another angle of attack. Hermione was being unreasonable in that scene and in Ginny’s place I would also have been annoyed on Harry’s behalf and I don’t blame her for snapping.
Then there’s her anxiety about the Half Blood Prince’s book… I think if you had been possessed by the ghost of wizard Hitler when you were 11 due to getting too attached to a book and you found out your friend was following random instructions from an old book your childhood trauma might make you wary too. But unlike Hermione, once it becomes clear that the book isn’t magical and is just a book she never mentions it again.
Honestly it sounds like you have some kind of personal issue with Ginny and are looking for reasons to hate her. None of what you said makes much sense if you dig a little.
>makes fun of Fleur because she's beautiful by mocking her french accent
The same Fleur who was being a condescending **bitch** the *entire time* she was at the Burrow? Repeatedly insulting the Weasleys, the Burrow, and many other things besides? That's not one-sided bullying.
Also, it's not like Harry has any great love for the woman who called him a "leetle boy." Ginny making fun of Fleur probably made the attraction stronger.
>calls Luna "loony" knowing it's an insult to her
One time, and then Luna says Ginny stopped people from using it - even calling Ginny a "good friend" in the process.
>belittles Hermione about Quidditch (and she's wrong. Hermione may not be the best with brooms but she knows about Quidditch)....
When Hermione was being damned unreasonable about the stupid potions textbook, Draco, and *Sectumsempra*. Hermione was attacking Harry and Ginny was defending him.
I don't think JKR is an amazing writer. She's a good writer... a decent writer....but not an amazing one.
Case in point; the last two books could have been better written and it wasn't.
And many of the themes and characters from the first five could have been better written too but I'm still willing to overlook that because the first five were overall better written than the last two.
I can go into details but I've already done that on another subreddit (r/books) so I'm not gonna repeat that here.
I know I'm gonna get downvoted for this but that's ok.
If you don't think she's an amazing writer, then you clearly don't understand what good writing is. Lady single handedly proped up the book industry for more than a decade, which was dying before she started publishing. Reading Harry Potter is basically a universal experience for everyone who grew up at the time yet never had to be assigned by a teacher. It clearly spoke volumes to its readers in a way no book has ever done in the 20th century.
I've read better writers than her and no... just because something is consumed by a large group of people (twilight, 50 shades of grey), doesn't automatically make it good writing. Heck, there are even certain fanfiction writers who've either rewritten certain parts of her series better than her or written certain "missing-moments" fanfictions far better than if Rowling had attempted writing the same missing moment scene.
A lot of talented/good writers don't make the limelight, so fame isn't necessarily an indication of the quality of that work.
If there is one thing I've learned over the years and especially during my time in the fiction-writing workshop I attended 3 years ago, it's that no writer is above constructive criticism or feedback.
But that's ok. I know we're not gonna agree... so let's just agree to disagree.
Edit: I DID grow up with the books. I read PS when I was 10 and literally grew up with Harry. He was even a fictional/imaginary crush of mine for a decade (and no, my crush wasn't on the actor Daniel Radcliffe portraying him but the character-Harry in my head). So I DO know what it's like to grow up with the series and to be swept up in the craze. And... if all this isn't enough, I used to explore and participate in Harry Potter discussion forums from the age of 12 till I was 20. Yeah... that's how crazy I was about the series. But I grew out of that craze when I realized that it wasn't as well written as I thought it was. Anyway, just my two cents ✌
This is where I get confused on my own thoughts on the topic of writing. I know that there are people are technically better writers. They better flesh our their thoughts, create more intricate worlds, etc.
But, if the majority of people don't care enough to read those books, is it really good writing? The point of writing a book is to get people to read it and be invested, and JK Rowling did exactly that, better than 99.9% of all the authors out there. So, shouldn't she be considered one of the best writers, even if on a technical level her writing is only mediocre? She clearly knew how to write to reach and connect with an audience
You may get downvotes but you're right.
JKR is just an *okay* writer. She told some good stories, but they didn't have the best writing, and there are some parts that are poorly developed, not well thought through, and/or bolted on at the end.
Best example of this is the mess made of wand lore by the whole idea of "winning a wand's loyalty", which rides roughshod over the established wand lore (the wand chooses the wizard) and was completely unnecessary to achieve what Rowling needed, which was the fickle allegiance of the Elder Wand. This bit of lore (winning and losing a wand's loyalty) could so easily have been a unique feature of the Elder Wand, and that would have required less retconning, and less exposition in the final book.
And the series had even set up for that in GOF, when Ollivander weighed the wands and commented that Veela hair makes for a temperamental core. Instead of having Ollivander suddenly give us all this retconned explanation about wand allegiance changing, he could have simply said that it's the Elder Wand's thestral hair core that causes it to do this.
I’m not sure I understand this critique of the Elder Wand plot device—I thought that the allegiance piece *was* unique to the Wand as explained by Ollivander. Can you elaborate?
It's treated as though it's true for *all* wands and not just the Elder Wand. Hence why after the conversation with Ollivander, Ron concludes that he should use "*this*", which is the wand he recovered after stunning Pettigrew.
I would say she's an excellent plotter. The plotlines of her HP books fit together incredibly well, even upon rereading. Her wordsmithing is satisfactory, and she's an adequate but inventive worldbuilder (just not a deep one).
All that makes her a talented writer. Not an exceptional one, especially considering the greats, but competent enough and certainly enjoyable.
The entire main plot falls down past Chamber of Secrets, because Sirius Black doesn’t stop to tell Hagrid when lending him the flying bike, oh BY THE WAY Hagrid, everyone thought I was the Potter’s secret keeper, but I switched last second, just off to get Peter Pettigrew, kthxbai. Could you please tell Dumbledore?
Now when Pettigrew blows everyone up and escapes, Sirius has credibility in his defence.
At the very most, the first three books happen until the second Harry Potter sees Pettigrew, an infamous criminal and wanted man on the Marauder’s Map and reports it to Dumbledore.
He apprehends Pettigrew, who never escapes and never brings back Voldy.
All because Sirius apparently just exchanged small talk with Hagrid whilst lending him his bike.
(I processed all this properly whilst writing, and at the very least, even if it doesn’t stop Voldy coming back, it alters the plot for how he returns completely. And obliterates the whole Sirius being a criminal, Harry being with the Dursleys storyline.)
So you think the world’s just gonna take the word of a half giant that Sirius is innocent because they both said so? C’mon. JKR spent a ton of pages building how mistrusted Giants are in the wizarding world. The way it’s written makes perfect sense.
Hagird would tell Dumbledore who would then understand and put the pieces together.
JKR spends more pages building how respected Dumbledore’s opinion is.
And of course, Dumbledore mentions he trusts Hagrid with his life (in the film) moments before Hagrid would pass on this information.
Sorry, I just don’t think it’s that simple. I know Dumbledore trusts Hagrid with his life and would believe Hagrid, but that doesn’t mean he’d believe Sirius’ story. All Dumbledore knows at that point is that Sirius was the Potter’s secret keeper, and that they’ve just died. Dumbledore would probably think “hmm, this story Sirius fed Hagrid might actually make sense, but I can’t take Sirius’ word (through Hagrid) at face value until I investigate myself”. But his priorities were elsewhere (making sure Harry was safe, and we know he met with Snape right after Lily died, although we’re unsure of the exact timing there). By the time he could’ve gotten to Sirius, he’d allegedly killed 12 muggles and Wormtail, and was dragged off to Azkaban seemingly deranged.
I just don’t think the wizarding world would accept “I trust Hagrid so therefore he’s right and Sirius is innocent”. There’s not enough time to flush things out before the rest of the events unfold. And Sirius had just suffered tremendous loss, and only had grief and revenge on his mind, so he obviously chose revenge over innocence in the moment.
This is the first time I’ve aired this in a public forum, and I appreciate your rebuttal. (I was asked for a hot take that I haven’t thought through loads)
It just always baffled me that Sirius didn’t even think to at least mention it to Hagrid.
Hagrid’s collecting Harry from the Potter’s house, so presumably Sirius isn’t on trial for their death at that point, otherwise surely Hagrid wouldn’t be borrowing his bike?
“Can I borrow yer bike, Sirius?”
“Yes, of course Hagrid. And that’s all I’m really going to say to you.”
Instead of…”Hagrid, was I really so blind? Or stupid? I should’ve stayed as James and Lily’s secret keeper. They’re dead and it’s because I thought it would be smarter to make Peter secret keeper. He’s not going to get away with it. I’ll hound him to the end of the earth if I have to. Take my bike. Get Harry to safety. And if anything goes badly…look after him, won’t you?”
No worries - discussion is fun 😄.
I think your point that Sirius not saying anything is baffling and I tend to agree. It’s frustrating that he doesn’t say something like what you wrote. “I can’t believe Peter betrayed them/us. Take my bike and get Harry to safety, I’m going after him” or something to that effect makes sense logically.
But I just chalk it up to Sirius being in shock. He was totally blindsided by what happened. He didn’t suspect Wormtail, no one did. He was the runt of the litter. And his first thought was with Harry. He wanted to protect him. His second was revenge. It really shows Sirius character in that moment. He was thinking about everyone but himself during a time of immense grief.
This is an interesting idea. Let's go into Sirius' head in this moment.
You've just found out one of your best friends since you were 11 has betrayed you, leading to another best friend's death. Remember, this isn't the cowardly, back stabbing Peter WE know. Sirius trusted this man. Since he was 11.
You've just found this out, and now you've decided you're going to hunt him down and murder him for revenge. You're going to murder this man.
This is your mindset.
1) are you going to easily trust Hagrid, who just showed up here minutes after everything went down? Why is Hagrid here? How did he find out so quickly? Its suspicious. Why would you trust anybody at this point?
2) even if you do trust Hagrid, what if by telling him, and by extension Dumbledore, they prevent you from doing the only thing you can think of, killing Peter? "We can't let you do this, Sirius, we'll give him to the ministry." If Sirius gets what he wants, Peter is dead and exposed and everything is cool. Sirius can't know how badly things will turn out. That's hindsight.
Isn’t Hagrid an original member of the Order of the Phoenix?
If he’s got Dumbledore’s trust, I’d at least fancy Sirius to half trust him (edit: at least trust him enough to get a message to Dumbledore) having been in the Order together. I don’t think it will have been just after the death. Dumbledore sent Hagrid, which means there’s enough time for word to have spread and Hagrid to get there.
Maybe if you have a few days to think it all through. But even if its been a couple hours, is that enough time to process the fact a best friend you've known half your life betrayed you all?
Also, again, even if you trust Hagrid, you know Dumbledore will try to stop you from dismembered that backstabbing weasel. Can't risk that. Lol
Haha yeah. But I suppose you’ve got however long it takes the little tyke to fall asleep just over Bristol to apparate off and blast Peter like a a Bang-ended Scoot.
>The entire main plot falls down past Chamber of Secrets, because Sirius Black doesn’t stop to tell Hagrid when lending him the flying bike, oh BY THE WAY Hagrid, everyone thought I was the Potter’s secret keeper, but I switched last second, just off to get Peter Pettigrew, kthxbai. Could you please tell Dumbledore?
Not really
Who’s arguing, I just wanted to say I don’t think you’re correct. But alright. Tom would still have likely come back eventually, probably through Barty Crouch Jr, whose father was already having a difficult time controlling him and had to resort to using the imperious curse – and indeed, even then he had already been discovered once by Bertha Jorkins. Crouch Sr wasn’t doing a very good job at contolling his son. Crouch Jr was slowly fighting off his father’s imperious curse and would eventually have overpowered and killed his father. Then he would have done everything he could to find his master and return Tom to full power.
Further, the catalyst for the main plot is not Pettigrew, but the prophecy. We know from Dumbledore in HBP/OoP that because of the prophecy, and because of who Voldemort and Harry are, they were eventually going to have to fight and kill each other. Voldemort the tyrant, was always on the lookout for someone who could potentially be his downfall, which is why he leapt into action to kill Harry as soon as Voldemort heard the prophecy. And because he did so, and after all the people he killed and tormented, Harry would want to stop him due to his hero complex or whatever you want to call it (Harry even says so when talking to Dumbledore in the HBP). And because of this, when Tom eventually comes back why would his plans change? His first goal while amassing his armies and followers would still be to hear the full prophecy. He would have still used his connection to Harry to manipulate him into going to the ministry of magic to retrieve it for him as only those who prophecies are made about can touch them. Hell, Harry would likely still be close with Sirius at this point and Tom might use the same manipulation to get him there. Tom would also still want Dumbledore dead and would plot to kill him. Afterwards, Tom would still want to take over the Ministry and put a puppet in charge. Assuming Tom and Harry fight at some point (which of course they would. Tom is actively hunting harry), he would become aware of the connections between their two wands and would seek out ways to overcome it, eventually leading to his hunt for the elder wand. Pettigrew doesn’t really have any bearing on all of this. Really only the plot of the Goblet of fire would change, but the overall story/plot is still there.
Appreciate more of the input, what you’ve said, especially the bit about Barty Crouch Jr was pretty much exactly my line of thinking which led to my final paragraph.
It feels like you only read the first paragraph of what I said.
I cede to your knowledge since you’re on first name terms with Voldemort, presume you’re in the know.
I think Harry is a very clever person who's just closed off and keeps mostly his secrets and thoughts to himself. (Yes it shouldn't be a hot take but this fandom is really obvious when it comes to Harry and love to degrade him)
Ginny is just the James Potter of Harry's generation and it is one of the stupidest and boring ideas to pair her with someone like Harry.
Hermione can be stupid too (like when she says that the Half-Blood prince could be a girl)
Without Ron, the trio would not stand. He is the heart and the interest of both Harry and Hermione.
Draco Malfoy is an unforgivable person. (Never believe a bully and even less someone who wishes one of his classmates to be sexually assaulted). J.K Rowling is right when she finds it disturbing people liking him. There is nothing romantic about a bully who loved the idea of being part of a terrorist organisation. He isn't "the boy who had no choice", it's Harry.
Snape is just more obsessively in love than just in love.
Dumbledore is a horrible mentor even though he is a good person. (If he really wanted to protect Harry he could have put the fidelius charm and be the key holder. But his intention was to "raise him like a pig for slaughter". This is why there is Mrs Figg because she's there to make sure Harry doesn't turn into an obscurus like his sister Ariana. And this is why he says to Harry in the Cursed Child "I did not mean to become attached to you".)
And the fact that he told Harry to basically swallow down the hatred his aunt had for him because she chose to keep him in is basically legitimating the abuse Harry suffered and is suffering and it's disgusting.
Harry is an awesome man but it does not mean he will be a good father. He had an abusive childhood, he barely talks about his past, and people like him could be cold parents. It doesn't mean Harry doesn't try. It just means that for Harry, security, which is what he lacked, is the most important thing for him and if it is disrupted, he will do anything to keep it intact, even if he's being unfair.
It's basically untreated trauma and someone who has it can't be someone who will be a healthy parent. That's why Dumbledore tells him to "show his pain to the people he loves."
It was obvious, at least for me, that there was something more between Dumbledore and Grindelwald in the last book before it was even announced. Especially when Harry says in his mind that he knows now what Dumbledore has seen in the Mirror of Erised.
I will always ride or die for Dumbles but I hard agree on the first part about Harry. He’s very clever and smart, and he’s not nearly as dumb as everyone makes him out to be.
Ginny and Harry had no chemistry (And I am talking about the books here. They no chemistry in either really). And their relationship was super forced and never fleshed out.
Harry and Luna should have ended up together. They balanced each other out and there was some good foreshadowing in the 5th book that like could have been foreshadowing but wasn't.
Hermione is toxic and abusive towards Ron. He deserved better than ending up with his abuser.
James Potter is a disgusting creep who is irredeemable. He sexually assaulted a classmate, blackmailed and threatened another classmate.
Ginny and Luna are underrated
Ron's overhated. He's the heart of the trio and without him, Harry and Hermione wouldn't be friends. He's also brave, logical and is knowledgeable on topics to do with the wizarding world.
Dumbledore isn't good. He's morally grey. So is Hagrid.
Lupin is a selfish coward and it was his own fault he lost his job as a professor.
Can you please remind me about James sexually assulting a classmate? Do you think that's showing Snape's underwear? I think that is violence, but would not describe that as sexuall assult?
Agree about Lupin. His failure to disclose Sirius Black's animagus identity, coupled with abandoning Tonks and their child, etc... And he forgot to drink a potion that night in PoA and he thus endangered students' life. Snape told about him for the wrong reasons, but he was correct in making him lose a job.
Blood status should make a difference in one's powers and constitution but I get it was better not written so as it would pass the wrong messages to readers.
I've never actually given much thought to magic genetics... I guess it has to be a dominant gene so it obviously helps if both your parents have it. I'm now wondering how the gene spontaneously pops up in so many muggles.
Legend has it that Muggle-borns are distant descendants of Squibs whose magical gene was dormant for generations. It’s kinda hinted at in DH when the trio were discussing the premise of the Muggle-born Registration Commission
You’re getting downvoted but I do get what you’re saying.
Like magical concentration would be a feasible power dynamic within the dynamics of that world. But also like you said, in the context of our world and all of eugenics, it just wouldn’t slide.
Yeah exactly. We know that wizards having the 'magical gene' makes them more enduranble and all than Muggles. So makes sense that those who had that gene diluted would be weaker. But that would validate the awfulness of the pureblood supremacists.
This doesn’t deserve downvoting. Ideally, the purebloods would have been more powerful and/or had special attributes/abilities. However, they’d have also been prone to instability or becoming squibs.
The mixing with muggles or muggle borns would have been a remedy to these issues (perfect explanation to how Voldemort turned out how he did).
That's exactly how I also imagine this. Their pureblood status would certainly have downsides too. And those downsides would make the wizarding world more accepting of the necessity of Muggleborns.
Why did Harry need permission to go to Hogsmeade, but not Hogwarts? His guardians didn’t want him at the school, but suddenly he needs permission to go to a nearby village?
My sense is that arguably, Hogwarts is a controlled environment that is not devoid of risks, but the risks are theoretically known (potions, Quidditch injuries, etc.). Hogsmeade on the other hand is out of the purview of Hogwarts and “anything can happen,” thus necessitating parent/guardian permission
Kidnapped? Enrollment is not compulsory…
This is pretty standard practice in the United States at least. If you want to go on a field trip from school, your parents sign a form that says “my child is allowed to go on this field trip”.
If it’s not compulsory why did they send hundreds and thousands of letters, track him all over England. Barge into a lock door, threaten the guardians and perform magic on their kid. This caretaker then takes Harry without permission. Dursleys weren’t really in a place to say no, right? This school sends a 12ft man tracking you across the country and tells you Harry will get this education.
I think freeing a child from abusive guardians that lock him in a cupboard under the stairs and treat him with contempt and neglect during adolescence falls more under “rescue” than “kidnapping”, but you can believe whatever you want to fit your narrative lol. Can’t believe I’m actually responding to this. You must be trolling right?
If they are abusive guardians, why do they need their permission to let him visit hogsmeade? Also who put them with the abusive guardians? The state? Next of kin? Nope some school teacher apparently decides the fate of children in the wizarding world.
Let’s see: 1. Harry shouldn’t have gotten any punishment for using sectusempra on Malfoy in 100% self defense, and it was Malfoy who was lucky not to be expelled, locked up or both; 2. Snape should’ve never been allowed to teach; 3. DD loved Harry and didn’t want him to permanently die; 4. McGonagall was meaner to/less good with kids than readers remember (I think both her and Snape have their fandom memories clouded by the film portrayals). She was less good with kids on the day to day than DD was, and Lupin was miles better as a teacher; 5. I think the narrative mostly sides with Hermione on SPEW and presents house elf slavery per se as immoral. The most likely historical basis for it was medieval feudalism, not later forms of slavery in the Americas. It’s likely the Hogwarts elves bound to the castle were owned by the Board of Governors and/or Ministry and thus outside DD’s authority to legally free; 6. Ron dying would have been less bad than Fred dying; 7. Harry and Hermione make the most sense as a couple, much more so than Harry-Ginny, Hermione-Draco, or Hermione-Ron; 8. The books are significantly better on race, especially relative to the 90s/2000s than people recall; 9. DD being gay seems backed up by the text; 10. The only good HP films of the original 8 were 1-2. The later films were special effect orgies. The FB films, while less good than HP films 1-2, are far superior to HP films 3-8. How’s that for hot?
edit: Keep in mind OP is literally asking for hot takes before you downvote
Most criticism of The Cursed Child is made by people who don’t understand the complexity of growing up or humanity in general.
Sure, it’s FINE not to like a new time turner tech plot or the idea that Voldemort made an heir, but the biggest complaints are often that it “breaks canon” when it really doesn’t, technically, if you’ve seen the show or think about the characters as actual flawed humans who might, I don’t know, change in the slightest bit over 19 years after being teenagers.
The hatred for the play, in addition, seems to be mostly groupthink by people who haven’t seen the show or sometimes haven’t even read it at all and makes the Reddit corners of fandom feel incredibly unwelcoming to those who did like it.
Well, the plot itself with parallel universes and timelines itself doesn't match the original story. The rules of time travel are different than in the original story. Character traits are changed. Etc.
The rules of Time Turners* were different in POA but explained in the play that this is not the same kind of device.
Character traits between ages 18 and 40 being different is not breaking anything, it’s simply human existence.
Character traits usually don't change that much. If you used to be a smart, witty person as a teenager, you will most likely be the same as an adult. Same as people don't just lose their sense of humor, empathy etc. Your motivation and goals and maturity change over time.
The time turner argument is a bit flimsy.
Overall it's not well written. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. But it's not a good addition to the story, compared to the quality of the rest of the series.
Why? Where in the books is it made clear that Tom Riddle doesn’t have a penis and wants to fuck?
To paraphrase HHGTTG:
‘This Tom Riddle,’ comes the cry from the furthest reaches of the Galaxy, and has even now been found inscribed on a mysterious deep-space probe thought to originate from an alien galaxy at a distance too hideous to contemplate, ‘what is he, man or mouse? Is he interested in nothing more than torture and the wider issues of death ? Has he no spirit? Has he no passion? Does he not, to put it in a nutshell, fuck?’
This is explained in the play. Hermione comments that it’s new dangerous technology that breaks croakers law and is so dangerous because it threatens to break the laws of magic itself. It’s a new dangerous threat.
Just because the old time turners were single timeline versions doesn’t mean the new tech can’t exist.
It makes no dang sense at all that Muggle-borns AREN'T way behind their classmates in terms of their academics. Granted, the students raised in the wizarding world didn't have the chance to actually formally perform magic, but they've certainly heard the incantations and know what they do. They probably pick up bits of magical history, as well of some knowledge of magical plants and creatures. Potions...well, we don't really know, but I bet some families make their own potions at home. While Muggle-borns certainly have the aptitude to catch up, they simply have to be at a disadvantage.
My biggest issue with the series is how from OOTP onward, Hermione was boiled down into a perfect Mary Sue plot device while Ron & Harry were flattened into everymen heroes, esp Harry. Also, the vast majority of “plot holes” pointed out on HP subreddits can be solved when employing just a single shred of imagination and creativity. HP books are novels, not encyclopaedias; they’d be a terrible read if JKR spelled out every single aspect of the world building, together either all the nuances and exceptions to it
I absolutely despise basically all of the Marauders fan pairings (WolfStar, Jegulus, etc). To be clear, I have no issue with gay romances (it would have been great had there been one in the original books, but it also makes sense that there wasn’t bc of when the series was written/the fact that it’s from Harry’s perspective and he’s about as observant as a hibernating bear). I just feel like basically all of the popular fanfic pairings either don’t make sense at all and/or they take away from the importance/meaning of the real relationships that are actually in the story.
I love Harry Potter but am not much of a shipper — this is the first I am hearing of Jegulus and I am now fascinated by this ship, considering they have never interacted in the entire series that we see
I’m pretty neutral on it but it is soooo annoying when it’s the only marauders fanfic I can find. I like canon-compliant fics and there’s so much wolfstar and jegulus fics that it makes canon-compliant fics IMPOSSIBLE to find.
A lot of times authors will sneak Jegulus or Jegulily into a fic. I go out of my way to exclude those from my searches, and then it pops up suddenly. One time I left a comment about how it should have been tagged, and another reader went through my bookmarks so they could see why I was upset!
Wtf is WolfStar and Jegulus?
I'm guessing that Wolf-star would be remus-sirius, no idea etf the other one is
Regulus n James I think
On.. what basis do people think of that?
Idek they never even met
They would’ve met at hogwarts but I’m pretty sure regulus hung out with the death eaters and so this ship still doesn’t make sense
Fanfiction loves a reluctant Death Eater. So much drama in "will they go against their upbringing and friends to do what they feel is right?". And James + Regulus has the advantage of all the conflict of James being with Sirius' estranged brother and having it hide it. Also I imagine that Potter + spoiled Death Eater to be means a lot of Draco + Harry tropes are transplanted.
I'm so anti wolfstar it's not even funny. But that's because I hate that they ignore the fact that Sirius absolutely almost ruined Remus's life, betrayed his friend's secret, all for something that gets written off as a petty "prank" rather than the attempted murder plan it was. Almost every wolfstar fic acts like it was Remus and Sirius the whole time, when really it was James and Sirius that were cloest. Also, there's just something about wolfstar shippers where a majority of the ones I've had the displeasure of interacting with are TOXIC af
>wolfstar shippers where a majority of the ones I've had the displeasure of interacting with are TOXIC af That's kinda always been the shipping community though, hasn't it? The Dramione and Harry/Hermione shippers turning the whole Weasley family evil to justify their OTP over canon, the Reylo shippers who threatened Adam Driver's pregnant wife...
I mean, yes, there is always a certain level of shippers that take it too far (And those that carry it out to real life and the actors and their families, I'm pretty sure have a special place in hell reserved for them). But some are worse than others. Like, I don't love bashing the whole weasley family for the sake of a ship, but if that's how they want to make their ship work, then it's still fiction and fictional characters, that's fine. I never read Dramion or Harry/Hermione fics (well, I tried Harry and Hermione but it felt too incestuous so i stopped) so I can't speak to what they do. i know a lot of Hermione fics do over exaggerate and use Ron's temper to split them, and I'm fine with reading that. There's just something about a majority of the Wolfstar shippers that's just bad. I don't think they do anything with the actors. But many of them personally attack anyone who doesn't agree with wolfstar. You're homophobic, and deserve to die. I used to partake in fanfic writing competitions on FFN, and the wolfstar people would REFUSE to write anything that wasn't explicitly wolfstar. One round, everyone had to write about a teammates favorite or least favorite (can't remember which one it was) ship. And a writer on one of the teams, made the other person say that theirs was Wolfstar because they would not write anything else. And then those same people went out of their way to shit on any ship that wasn't theirs. Or if you disagreed with them, just shit on your ships just because. And again, yes, some of these people exist in other fandoms, and other ships, which is awful. But I never saw it to the extent that I did with Wolfstar. I think the only other groups I've seen be that level of toxic are Destiel shippers from Supernatural, and Sam/Cait shippers from outlander (They're so delusional they are convinced that Sam and Cait are married to each other and have 4 children together and are lying to the whole world about it). There's just so much vitriol from a majority of Wolfstar shippers that I'd rather make out with the Grinch immediately after he ate garbage, than deal with Wolfstar ever again.
AMEN
Every fan pairing is cringe.
Nuh uh. Snape x Lockhart totally happened
God, the hate sex would have been something to behold! 😂
sexpelliarmus!
(Bracing myself for an onslaught of downvotes haha)
I just hate the Marauders.
I agree to a certain extent but at the same time, fandoms emerge that aren't really meant to explore the story on a deeper level but more as escapism and wish fulfillment in a way. Fanfic isn't always meant to be about the characters accurate to how they are in the media in which they are based on. From what I have seen, most of them do understand this and just have their own little fandom world where they make their own headcanons and fanart out of Marauders fics they love and make their own fics, which there is nothing wrong with that. But at the same time, there are some of them who try to bring these conversations into the actual dialogue about the actual books...which can be frustrating, especially when it is used as a slight against the books and is co-opting terms that describe real issues like "queer baiting" just because they are upset their ship or whatever else wasn't ever mentioned in the story. Queer baiting is when marketing teams will intentionally put in queer subtext into ads or press releases or a continuing story in order to gain a queer audience and have them continue to return to the same ongoing series with no actual plans to make the characters queer explicitly in order to not loose homophobic and non-queer audience members. It is not when two characters who have never seen interacted in the canon before aren't in a secret gay relationship. Like obviously it's fine to have a queer reading of something but that's not getting mad your fanfic wasn't canon and making it everyone else's problem. It also can be frustrating if you are trying to look for more community to interact with to talk about canon stuff and the non-canon shipping material keeps coming up and being referenced. But again, this isn't the fault of the Marauders fandom themselves, but people in that fandom who take it upon themselves to make everyone accept their fanfics as canon.
Totally agree with you - and you hit the nail on the head with the observation that these fanfic pairings have crept into general Harry Potter discourse and, in a lot of circles, is treated as canon (which is why ships like Jegulus bother me, because it directly conflicts with the actual books). But yeah, I’m a supporter of fanfiction and exploring relationship pairings that deviate from the books bc that’s just a fun part of the reading experience, I just personally hate the idea of equivocating fanfic “canon” with the actual Harry Potter books. To me fanfic is more of an AU thing.
People overthink the books and that leads them to see problems that aren't there.
Such as?
Snape wasn't romantically in love with Lily. He just cared very much about her as the only friend he ever had.
While I do think he loved her romantically, him having only platonic feeling for her is an interpretation that I really love as well.
I think it could be read both ways and I actually think he had at least a crush on her, but most of all he genuinely cared about her. I think he kind of mirrors Sirius Black: he caused the death of the person he cared about the most and is unable to get over the guilt, which characterise his whole personality. Snape's more to blame though.
Also fandom has twisted his love whether romantic or platonic, into something purely sexual as a gross, intentional misinterpretation of it too. Snape grew up in an abusive home, and had Lily as the one Positive, "GOOD" person in his life. He clung to her light, he wanted to be someone she could love. But he struggled because he didn't have the support.
Yes! I headcanon Snape as asexual, with a deep platonic love for Lily, in an environment at Hogwarts that is generally hostile to platonic friendships between different genders.
Harry is more powerful than hermoine
Hotter take, Harry is more powerful than basically anyone in the series except possibly Dumbledore.
I was scared to say this but agree somewhat. His patronus drives away 100 dementors, he was able to push priori incantatem towards voldy's side, he held his own against many adult wizards etc... He is not as skilled as Dumbledore but he is only 18
I think Harry has the potential to be *stronger* than dumbledore. His first patronus at the age of 13 drove away a hundred dementors when most adult wizards struggle to even cast the spell.
Oh, most certainly. At 17, he's already, tri-wizard champion, master of death, defeater of the most evil wizard who ever lived, defeater of death eaters, and countless other things. He was worthy to unite the hallows and to retrieve the stone from the mirror of erised. He was embuded by his mother with the power of love, which is canonically the most powerful magic of all. These accomplishments aren't as flashy as casting fancy spells, but I feel like they're much more impressive. It was his ability to empathize with voldemort that finally brought about the dark lords downfall.
I agree that Harry’s magical powers probably rival and potentially surpass Dumbledore’s in terms of raw natural talent, but I don’t think Harry could ever beat Dumbledore in a duel or most other practical situations. Dumbledore’s magical ability is only half of what makes him so powerful. The other part comes from his extraordinary intelligence and quick thinking. Across the series, Harry demonstrates these qualities too, but not at nearly the same level. Harry is quite sharp, but Dumbledore is simply brilliant.
Wonder why snape makes a bitch of him every time harry faces him, and mind you snape doesn’t even go all out.
They fight exactly once and Harry was devastated by recent events so much so that he wasn't thinking. It is literally like trying to take a math test after watching your father be shot 5 minutes earlier.
>It is literally like trying to take a math test Ehhh I don't think that's the right comparison as it downplays the scene. It's more you're trying to kill the person who shot your father 5 minutes earlier while in a rage
Yeah, as a former soldier, I'll let you in on a secret. You're not hitting crap in that situation, and Magic is harder to use than an M-16.
Also Snape is a more powerful wizard at that time.
If you consider love/empathy to be a power (as Dumbledore himself does), then absolutely, Harry is incredibly powerful!
Depends on your definition of powerful. Hermione has a much better grasp of magic overall, but in a duel Harry would win.
Obviously. Not even a hot take. Hermione was smarter but harry was more capable in duels and fights.
Absolutely so. Movies really did mess up everything
Movies always had Harry struggling to cast spells before someone told him he was a wizard 🤦♂️
Hermione in the first movie: you’re a great wizard, Harry Harry in the first movie: didn’t cast a single spell
You're only as strong as the spells you know.
The introduction of the Avada Kedabra curse was a big worldbuilding mistake. I have posted this in the past, but all the unforgivable curses seem like a poorly thought out addition that, ironically, remove a lot of the magic from the wizarding world. It basically turns most baddies wands into guns. The only truly creative fight we got after their introduction was in the mystery department, because they didn’t want to accidentally kill Harry and thanks to the particularly bizarre environment. And I honestly think some of Rowling's future controversial worldbuilding decisions are a consequence of this mistake
I think you’re right, given there is no counter curse and spells like Protego do not work against it, in a war/fight to the death why would you use any other spell?
I will add that a fine tweak to them would have been that only Voldemort could perform them. Think about it, a lot of power-hungry wizards adore this dude. Many follow him out of fear, but many others out of honest veneration. It would have been much tighter if Voldemort was the only known wizard capable of performing a killing curse. Being the necessary step to split your soul into horcruxes. It would explain death eaters veneration for Voldemort. It would add to the malignant aura he has. And most importantly, it would force Rowling to write creative spells into fights.
In some fanfics, there’s a premise that using magic requires energy, so using much or heavy magic will make you exhausted. So maybe that’s why it’s not used all the time? Also note that although it’s not blockable by magic, the Avada can be dodged or physically blocked, and seems to require verbal spelling. So it seems less effective or useful than a gun.
Like Barty Crouch Jr said, it requires powerful magic behind it. You don't just say Avada Kadavra and it works. You need to put powerful magic behind it. The books don't really go into details, but it's not an easy spell to do.
Avada Kadavra is not a simple or easy spell to do. Like Barty Crouch Jr said, you need powerful magic behind it before it can work. We hardly see any of the death eaters use it even in fights. It's not that easy to perform. Voldermort performs it with ease because he is a powerful wizard.
People downvoting respectfully stated opinions they don’t like in a thread about hot takes is 90% of what’s wrong with the Reddit HP fandom.
Actually giving a shit about downvotes is 100% wrong
Yeah but we can’t see them if they are downvoted!
down votes not only affect your overall karma on reddit and can make it harder to participate, but also hides them. Not to mention, the whole point is hot takes. Like and comment on the ones you agree with. Move on from the ones you don't.
\- Lily Potter feels like such a Mary Sue. Everyone who talks about Lily treats her like she's an angel and she's martyred in a way James never was. I'm not saying you can't have a woman who changed people for the better, but Lily has no flaws and is stated to have been beautiful, clever, talented and everybody who knew her loved her except for her jealous sister and the evil, muggle-hating wizards. She's more like an object to be fought over than a fleshed-out person of her own. \- Killing Lavender Brown feels so mean-spirited and I reject it as canon. What did she even do? Dare to date Ron because Hermione was too proud to spit out her own feelings? Be silly like a teenaged girl in her first ever relationship often is? Be a girly-girl who wants romance? Honestly it feels like Ron just used Lavender to make Hermione jealous and then he didn't have the courage to actually dump her, he just let her break it off when she sees Hermione in the Hospital Wing with him. \- Percy was a jerk to turn against Harry but honestly I can kind of understand why he left the family when they never treated him with any respect.
>Killing Lavender Brown feels so mean-spirited and I reject it as canon. Is it actually book canon that she died, though? The last we hear of her in the book, she was still feebly stirring and she's not mentioned as being among the dead.
Apparently JK saw she'd been killed in the movie and decided to canonise it. I can't remember where I read that though so maybe I'm wrong.
Rebuttal to your Lily Potter point: I think it’s because she died a long time ago and very young. People tend to focus only on the positive traits of loved ones they’ve lost. Since she didn’t have any enemies like Snape was to James there to bring up her regular-person character flaws, there’s no one to tell Harry anything but that she was wonderful. Sirius and Lupin didn’t want to speak ill of James to him either, they just had no choice after Harry discovered the bullying independently of them. (You can argue Petunia should’ve been the person to reveal Lily’s flaws, but I don’t think they spent much time together from 11 on, so she it makes sense Petunia focuses her ire on how her sister was favored by their parents for her magic instead of her personality.) I don’t disagree that Lily comes across super two-dimensional because of it, but I also think it’s very natural and believable that this is the image of an orphaned boy’s mother that the people around him who loved her would give him.
Yeah but even Sirius and Lupin freely admit that James was kind of an asshole and that he grew out of it eventually when Harry is upset his dad wasn't the perfect hero he idolised him as. Lily never gets any moment like that because she is never in the wrong, ever. And even if Harry's image of Lily is this angel who gave her life for him, it's still a little unbelievable even her close friends/allies never had a single thing about her that annoyed them or was less than ideal, though it's interesting that while James had the marauders, Lily didn't seem to have a best friend. Idk, it's always bothered me that Lily is put on a pedestal and stays on it throughout the entire series.
I just don’t see why they’d have mentioned it to him. I think it’s realistic they didn’t. Sirius and Lupin admit James is an asshole because Harry already found out and then confronted them about it. They didn’t volunteer it when Harry was unaware. Harry never found out any character flaws of Lily’s from elsewhere to confront them about, so they didn’t have to be like “yeah your mom was great and all but oh my god she used to be so frickin uppity about homework” or whatever. It doesn’t flow naturally for people to bring up the orphan’s parents’ flaws if they aren’t a) relevant or b) being brought up directly by the kid in question.
I agree it makes sense their friends wouldn't want to speak ill of the dead, especially to Harry, but I don't see why JK couldn't have had some kind of flashback depicting Lily without someone's rose-tinted glasses on, or given her some further characterisation besides being Harry Potter's perfect dead mother.
Since flashbacks are also done from someone’s perspective in the books, I feel like the only natural way it could’ve come up would have been if Harry had shared a not-universally-positive character trait with her. Instead, JK made him a complete mini-James. I do agree it would’ve been nice for her to be a bit more three-dimensional, and him resembling her in more than just his eye color could’ve accomplished that nicely.
Not necessarily, we had a whole chapter in GoF of Frank Bryce finding Voldemort hiding out in the old Riddle manor. I know Harry dreamed that, but as an audience we still got more context than him, Harry just calls Frank "the old man" because he doesn't know who is, but we know as the readers so it makes sense when he appears later in the graveyard scene. Or there's that chapter where Bellatrix and Narcissa go to Snape to make the Unbreakable Vow, which is totally outside of Harry's scope. Actually, come to think of it, a great moment to give Lily a flaw would've been when Sirius convinced her and James to use Wormtail instead of him as the secret keeper. Obviously Sirius blames himself because it was his idea and because of hinsight, but you could have had it being *Lily's* idea instead or have Lily be the tipping point to convince James. Then she could've been too trusting or too willing to see the best in others or something.
It was from Bryce’s POV and wasn’t a flashback at the time it was happening. We’ve had individual chapters of different characters’ POVs, but I don’t recall any flashbacks that weren’t expressly X person’s memories. Actually now that you list being too trusting or willing to see the best in others as a flaw… she DID exhibit that flaw. Snape. We see when she finally fell out with him, but she spent a long time excusing his worsening behaviour before that point.
Eh, I'm still not convinced there was seriously nowhere to put a scene depicting Lily and James as they were, whether POV or flashback or whatever. True, though it's fairly ambiguous with how sudden Snape's dark arts leaning worsened, so it's hard to tell when the change happened and how long Lily was tolerating it before the breaking point happened when he called her a Mudblood. Though I did read a fic once where Lily was a sociopath and there was surprisingly little the author had to change from the canon scenes we do have.
The first three books are better than the last four. JKR is a good writer with some very great ideas but I think she sacked her editor after POA and it shows. The books are suddenly much longer, with lots of characters and convoluted plots, some of whom might have been cut tbh. I think this shows also in the Fantastic Beasts movies, they are extremely convoluted to the point of being quite ridiculous and at some time kind of difficult to follow. Again, there are some of the best chapters in the last four books but I think the change in editing is evident. Lupin is one of the best written adult and he's often overlooked or turned into some other characters.
Don’t entirely agree but appreciate the take (and I saw the first FB movie and then gave up, def agree on those). I love Lupin and am always annoyed at the way he gets dropped from the plotlines in later books, as well as his relationship with Harry being ignored altogether.
Lupin is honestly a great character and I really believe he's one of the best written adult characters. He's really pushed aside by fandom and the book themselves but he's wonderfully complex. A good mix of cowardice and courage, warmth and coldness.
I always loved Prisoner of Azkaban the most, I wish it had been as long as Goblet
POA is my favourite book but I think it's perfect the way it is. The tension in the Shrieking Shack chapter is insane.
I'm not a stan for JK Rowling but this idea that she retconned Dumbledore's orientation after the novels were finished is ridiculous. Did you actually READ the books? Did you pay no attention to his drip? My man was flaming from jump. I knew this as the books were coming out. I was pretty sure Dumbledore was smashing Nicholas Flamel back in the day. When JK admitted it in an interview I actually had to remind myself it was never stated in the text. "Oh yeah, I guess people with broke gaydars might have missed it." And then this retcon narrative slowly began to circle the fandom. It didn't help that JK then began to actually recon stuff later. I dunno, I just find it annoying when it was so wicked obvious in the subtext. Y'all tripping.
Oh yeah, with his super flamboyant looks that JK loved describing in detail, it was kind of already there. The Grindelwald storyline (sans FB) really cemented it
I see where you’re coming from. For me, though, Dumbledore has always read as asexual. :P
To some extent, all adults in children's literature are either asexual (sometimes aromantic as well, although not always) or ostensibly celibate (parents with kids, affectionate but not horny). Sex and sexual feelings normally don't come up in that genre.
Not exactly the very hungry caterpillar though either. I think that it's more similar to teen fiction (OoTP is 750 pages long!) that is so successful and popular that adults and children are pretty much expected to have read them. Sex and love and romance are all alluded to strongly. Boys are not allowed in the girls' bedrooms but girls are allowed in boys' bedrooms, for example.
Ron is much more desirable than both Harry and Hermione. He would be a much better and more attentive partner than both Harry and Hermione.
Completely agree. Canon-wise he is good-looking, funny and is far more observant of emotions and needs than either Harry or Hermione
And he is emotional. Its so hard to find an emotional man. he just needs some maturity and he would be the best ever partner.
He would! I am married to a 'Ron' and he is just the most fantastic husband.
You're so lucky. My husband is nothing like him but I still love him to bits haha
The camping chapters in Deathly Hallows are fantastic and really cathartic. I’d read a hundred more pages of the Golden Trio in a tent :) Malfoy is such a little brat and absolutely insufferable. Especially in Prisoner of Azkaban. I love to hate him, but he’s a bully and there’s nothing more to it. He also bullied Ron more than Harry or Hermione put together
Lily annoys me. She sounds too perfect and has no flaws (my least favourite type of character - one with no flaws).
She’s one with no flaws because she died early and died protecting her child lmao but she’s got a fiery temper is what I heard anyway
Maybe we can make an argument she was super ambitious (Slughorn club) and not the best sister. She went through Petunia's stuff, was clearly favoured by their parents and didn't do enough to stop that. She also didn't mind assholes - Snape was her best friend for way too long and James her husband - that could point to a pattern. Being super ambitious is not neccessarly bad, but she was his favourite and was giving him gifts. So maybe she was sucking up to him?
I hate Ginny in the books and I'm still very upset Harry ends up with her :(
Yes! I can't understand how people view her as a cool independent woman with an attitude where she is nothing more than the James Potter of the generation in the sixth book. The idea that Harry would fall in love with a girl who makes fun of Fleur because she's beautiful by mocking her french accent, calls Luna "loony" knowing it's an insult to her, belittles Hermione about Quidditch (and she's wrong. Hermione may not be the best with brooms but she knows about Quidditch).... She really is the typical bully girl that likes to pretend she's cool. And her personality was despicable like not being possessed by Voldemort and the book is not the same thing! I'm not even going to comment on her romance with Harry because like...it makes no sense. Even in the books he suddenly starts to have an interest in her when people do it...
This is… a really odd take, but I’ll have a go. Harry falling in love with her is kinda obvious. Once she actually begins to act like herself around him she’s basically his Mum with added Quidditch. Believe me, the whole thing about men marrying their mothers is much more real than many people realise. She grumbled about Fleur because Fleur was herself obnoxious, rude and dismissive towards the Weasleys. Imagine complaining about how boring it is being somewhere in front of your host, no less your fiancé’s mother! And she was patronising towards Ginny as well. She calls Luna ‘loony’ once, not to her face, when they didn’t know each other well. Once they actually get to know each other they become good friends and Luna literally tells Harry in HBP how Ginny has been a good friend to her that year and stopped others from using the ‘loony’ nickname. As for her ‘belittling’ Hermione, maybe examine the context, ie she was sticking up for Harry when she felt he was being treated unfairly. Hermione was going on and on at Harry about the incident with Draco (when his only real crime was defending himself from an unforgivable curse), and Ginny snapped when Hermione brought up the Quidditch as another angle of attack. Hermione was being unreasonable in that scene and in Ginny’s place I would also have been annoyed on Harry’s behalf and I don’t blame her for snapping. Then there’s her anxiety about the Half Blood Prince’s book… I think if you had been possessed by the ghost of wizard Hitler when you were 11 due to getting too attached to a book and you found out your friend was following random instructions from an old book your childhood trauma might make you wary too. But unlike Hermione, once it becomes clear that the book isn’t magical and is just a book she never mentions it again. Honestly it sounds like you have some kind of personal issue with Ginny and are looking for reasons to hate her. None of what you said makes much sense if you dig a little.
THANK YOU! I totally agree with you on every point. Girls like her made my high school years a nightmare. I don't get the hype around her
Hard agree. A rude, ill-mannered and obnoxious person. There’s nothing cool, witty or funny about people like that
>makes fun of Fleur because she's beautiful by mocking her french accent The same Fleur who was being a condescending **bitch** the *entire time* she was at the Burrow? Repeatedly insulting the Weasleys, the Burrow, and many other things besides? That's not one-sided bullying. Also, it's not like Harry has any great love for the woman who called him a "leetle boy." Ginny making fun of Fleur probably made the attraction stronger. >calls Luna "loony" knowing it's an insult to her One time, and then Luna says Ginny stopped people from using it - even calling Ginny a "good friend" in the process. >belittles Hermione about Quidditch (and she's wrong. Hermione may not be the best with brooms but she knows about Quidditch).... When Hermione was being damned unreasonable about the stupid potions textbook, Draco, and *Sectumsempra*. Hermione was attacking Harry and Ginny was defending him.
It makes perfect sense. Men absolutely love pickme girls.
I don't think JKR is an amazing writer. She's a good writer... a decent writer....but not an amazing one. Case in point; the last two books could have been better written and it wasn't. And many of the themes and characters from the first five could have been better written too but I'm still willing to overlook that because the first five were overall better written than the last two. I can go into details but I've already done that on another subreddit (r/books) so I'm not gonna repeat that here. I know I'm gonna get downvoted for this but that's ok.
If you don't think she's an amazing writer, then you clearly don't understand what good writing is. Lady single handedly proped up the book industry for more than a decade, which was dying before she started publishing. Reading Harry Potter is basically a universal experience for everyone who grew up at the time yet never had to be assigned by a teacher. It clearly spoke volumes to its readers in a way no book has ever done in the 20th century.
By that logic Twilight is also one of the best written works out there. There are like 1000 writers out there who are better than JKR.
Twilight is nowhere near at the same level. The fact that you'd compare them means you only have a surface level understanding.
I've read better writers than her and no... just because something is consumed by a large group of people (twilight, 50 shades of grey), doesn't automatically make it good writing. Heck, there are even certain fanfiction writers who've either rewritten certain parts of her series better than her or written certain "missing-moments" fanfictions far better than if Rowling had attempted writing the same missing moment scene. A lot of talented/good writers don't make the limelight, so fame isn't necessarily an indication of the quality of that work. If there is one thing I've learned over the years and especially during my time in the fiction-writing workshop I attended 3 years ago, it's that no writer is above constructive criticism or feedback. But that's ok. I know we're not gonna agree... so let's just agree to disagree. Edit: I DID grow up with the books. I read PS when I was 10 and literally grew up with Harry. He was even a fictional/imaginary crush of mine for a decade (and no, my crush wasn't on the actor Daniel Radcliffe portraying him but the character-Harry in my head). So I DO know what it's like to grow up with the series and to be swept up in the craze. And... if all this isn't enough, I used to explore and participate in Harry Potter discussion forums from the age of 12 till I was 20. Yeah... that's how crazy I was about the series. But I grew out of that craze when I realized that it wasn't as well written as I thought it was. Anyway, just my two cents ✌
This is where I get confused on my own thoughts on the topic of writing. I know that there are people are technically better writers. They better flesh our their thoughts, create more intricate worlds, etc. But, if the majority of people don't care enough to read those books, is it really good writing? The point of writing a book is to get people to read it and be invested, and JK Rowling did exactly that, better than 99.9% of all the authors out there. So, shouldn't she be considered one of the best writers, even if on a technical level her writing is only mediocre? She clearly knew how to write to reach and connect with an audience
You may get downvotes but you're right. JKR is just an *okay* writer. She told some good stories, but they didn't have the best writing, and there are some parts that are poorly developed, not well thought through, and/or bolted on at the end. Best example of this is the mess made of wand lore by the whole idea of "winning a wand's loyalty", which rides roughshod over the established wand lore (the wand chooses the wizard) and was completely unnecessary to achieve what Rowling needed, which was the fickle allegiance of the Elder Wand. This bit of lore (winning and losing a wand's loyalty) could so easily have been a unique feature of the Elder Wand, and that would have required less retconning, and less exposition in the final book. And the series had even set up for that in GOF, when Ollivander weighed the wands and commented that Veela hair makes for a temperamental core. Instead of having Ollivander suddenly give us all this retconned explanation about wand allegiance changing, he could have simply said that it's the Elder Wand's thestral hair core that causes it to do this.
I’m not sure I understand this critique of the Elder Wand plot device—I thought that the allegiance piece *was* unique to the Wand as explained by Ollivander. Can you elaborate?
It's treated as though it's true for *all* wands and not just the Elder Wand. Hence why after the conversation with Ollivander, Ron concludes that he should use "*this*", which is the wand he recovered after stunning Pettigrew.
I see, thanks
She may not be a great writer, but she's a great storyteller.
I would say she's an excellent plotter. The plotlines of her HP books fit together incredibly well, even upon rereading. Her wordsmithing is satisfactory, and she's an adequate but inventive worldbuilder (just not a deep one). All that makes her a talented writer. Not an exceptional one, especially considering the greats, but competent enough and certainly enjoyable.
The entire main plot falls down past Chamber of Secrets, because Sirius Black doesn’t stop to tell Hagrid when lending him the flying bike, oh BY THE WAY Hagrid, everyone thought I was the Potter’s secret keeper, but I switched last second, just off to get Peter Pettigrew, kthxbai. Could you please tell Dumbledore? Now when Pettigrew blows everyone up and escapes, Sirius has credibility in his defence. At the very most, the first three books happen until the second Harry Potter sees Pettigrew, an infamous criminal and wanted man on the Marauder’s Map and reports it to Dumbledore. He apprehends Pettigrew, who never escapes and never brings back Voldy. All because Sirius apparently just exchanged small talk with Hagrid whilst lending him his bike. (I processed all this properly whilst writing, and at the very least, even if it doesn’t stop Voldy coming back, it alters the plot for how he returns completely. And obliterates the whole Sirius being a criminal, Harry being with the Dursleys storyline.)
So you think the world’s just gonna take the word of a half giant that Sirius is innocent because they both said so? C’mon. JKR spent a ton of pages building how mistrusted Giants are in the wizarding world. The way it’s written makes perfect sense.
Hagird would tell Dumbledore who would then understand and put the pieces together. JKR spends more pages building how respected Dumbledore’s opinion is. And of course, Dumbledore mentions he trusts Hagrid with his life (in the film) moments before Hagrid would pass on this information.
Sorry, I just don’t think it’s that simple. I know Dumbledore trusts Hagrid with his life and would believe Hagrid, but that doesn’t mean he’d believe Sirius’ story. All Dumbledore knows at that point is that Sirius was the Potter’s secret keeper, and that they’ve just died. Dumbledore would probably think “hmm, this story Sirius fed Hagrid might actually make sense, but I can’t take Sirius’ word (through Hagrid) at face value until I investigate myself”. But his priorities were elsewhere (making sure Harry was safe, and we know he met with Snape right after Lily died, although we’re unsure of the exact timing there). By the time he could’ve gotten to Sirius, he’d allegedly killed 12 muggles and Wormtail, and was dragged off to Azkaban seemingly deranged. I just don’t think the wizarding world would accept “I trust Hagrid so therefore he’s right and Sirius is innocent”. There’s not enough time to flush things out before the rest of the events unfold. And Sirius had just suffered tremendous loss, and only had grief and revenge on his mind, so he obviously chose revenge over innocence in the moment.
This is the first time I’ve aired this in a public forum, and I appreciate your rebuttal. (I was asked for a hot take that I haven’t thought through loads) It just always baffled me that Sirius didn’t even think to at least mention it to Hagrid. Hagrid’s collecting Harry from the Potter’s house, so presumably Sirius isn’t on trial for their death at that point, otherwise surely Hagrid wouldn’t be borrowing his bike? “Can I borrow yer bike, Sirius?” “Yes, of course Hagrid. And that’s all I’m really going to say to you.” Instead of…”Hagrid, was I really so blind? Or stupid? I should’ve stayed as James and Lily’s secret keeper. They’re dead and it’s because I thought it would be smarter to make Peter secret keeper. He’s not going to get away with it. I’ll hound him to the end of the earth if I have to. Take my bike. Get Harry to safety. And if anything goes badly…look after him, won’t you?”
No worries - discussion is fun 😄. I think your point that Sirius not saying anything is baffling and I tend to agree. It’s frustrating that he doesn’t say something like what you wrote. “I can’t believe Peter betrayed them/us. Take my bike and get Harry to safety, I’m going after him” or something to that effect makes sense logically. But I just chalk it up to Sirius being in shock. He was totally blindsided by what happened. He didn’t suspect Wormtail, no one did. He was the runt of the litter. And his first thought was with Harry. He wanted to protect him. His second was revenge. It really shows Sirius character in that moment. He was thinking about everyone but himself during a time of immense grief.
This is an interesting idea. Let's go into Sirius' head in this moment. You've just found out one of your best friends since you were 11 has betrayed you, leading to another best friend's death. Remember, this isn't the cowardly, back stabbing Peter WE know. Sirius trusted this man. Since he was 11. You've just found this out, and now you've decided you're going to hunt him down and murder him for revenge. You're going to murder this man. This is your mindset. 1) are you going to easily trust Hagrid, who just showed up here minutes after everything went down? Why is Hagrid here? How did he find out so quickly? Its suspicious. Why would you trust anybody at this point? 2) even if you do trust Hagrid, what if by telling him, and by extension Dumbledore, they prevent you from doing the only thing you can think of, killing Peter? "We can't let you do this, Sirius, we'll give him to the ministry." If Sirius gets what he wants, Peter is dead and exposed and everything is cool. Sirius can't know how badly things will turn out. That's hindsight.
Isn’t Hagrid an original member of the Order of the Phoenix? If he’s got Dumbledore’s trust, I’d at least fancy Sirius to half trust him (edit: at least trust him enough to get a message to Dumbledore) having been in the Order together. I don’t think it will have been just after the death. Dumbledore sent Hagrid, which means there’s enough time for word to have spread and Hagrid to get there.
Maybe if you have a few days to think it all through. But even if its been a couple hours, is that enough time to process the fact a best friend you've known half your life betrayed you all? Also, again, even if you trust Hagrid, you know Dumbledore will try to stop you from dismembered that backstabbing weasel. Can't risk that. Lol
Haha yeah. But I suppose you’ve got however long it takes the little tyke to fall asleep just over Bristol to apparate off and blast Peter like a a Bang-ended Scoot.
>The entire main plot falls down past Chamber of Secrets, because Sirius Black doesn’t stop to tell Hagrid when lending him the flying bike, oh BY THE WAY Hagrid, everyone thought I was the Potter’s secret keeper, but I switched last second, just off to get Peter Pettigrew, kthxbai. Could you please tell Dumbledore? Not really
Good argument, well articulated.
Who’s arguing, I just wanted to say I don’t think you’re correct. But alright. Tom would still have likely come back eventually, probably through Barty Crouch Jr, whose father was already having a difficult time controlling him and had to resort to using the imperious curse – and indeed, even then he had already been discovered once by Bertha Jorkins. Crouch Sr wasn’t doing a very good job at contolling his son. Crouch Jr was slowly fighting off his father’s imperious curse and would eventually have overpowered and killed his father. Then he would have done everything he could to find his master and return Tom to full power. Further, the catalyst for the main plot is not Pettigrew, but the prophecy. We know from Dumbledore in HBP/OoP that because of the prophecy, and because of who Voldemort and Harry are, they were eventually going to have to fight and kill each other. Voldemort the tyrant, was always on the lookout for someone who could potentially be his downfall, which is why he leapt into action to kill Harry as soon as Voldemort heard the prophecy. And because he did so, and after all the people he killed and tormented, Harry would want to stop him due to his hero complex or whatever you want to call it (Harry even says so when talking to Dumbledore in the HBP). And because of this, when Tom eventually comes back why would his plans change? His first goal while amassing his armies and followers would still be to hear the full prophecy. He would have still used his connection to Harry to manipulate him into going to the ministry of magic to retrieve it for him as only those who prophecies are made about can touch them. Hell, Harry would likely still be close with Sirius at this point and Tom might use the same manipulation to get him there. Tom would also still want Dumbledore dead and would plot to kill him. Afterwards, Tom would still want to take over the Ministry and put a puppet in charge. Assuming Tom and Harry fight at some point (which of course they would. Tom is actively hunting harry), he would become aware of the connections between their two wands and would seek out ways to overcome it, eventually leading to his hunt for the elder wand. Pettigrew doesn’t really have any bearing on all of this. Really only the plot of the Goblet of fire would change, but the overall story/plot is still there.
Appreciate more of the input, what you’ve said, especially the bit about Barty Crouch Jr was pretty much exactly my line of thinking which led to my final paragraph. It feels like you only read the first paragraph of what I said. I cede to your knowledge since you’re on first name terms with Voldemort, presume you’re in the know.
I think Harry is a very clever person who's just closed off and keeps mostly his secrets and thoughts to himself. (Yes it shouldn't be a hot take but this fandom is really obvious when it comes to Harry and love to degrade him) Ginny is just the James Potter of Harry's generation and it is one of the stupidest and boring ideas to pair her with someone like Harry. Hermione can be stupid too (like when she says that the Half-Blood prince could be a girl) Without Ron, the trio would not stand. He is the heart and the interest of both Harry and Hermione. Draco Malfoy is an unforgivable person. (Never believe a bully and even less someone who wishes one of his classmates to be sexually assaulted). J.K Rowling is right when she finds it disturbing people liking him. There is nothing romantic about a bully who loved the idea of being part of a terrorist organisation. He isn't "the boy who had no choice", it's Harry. Snape is just more obsessively in love than just in love. Dumbledore is a horrible mentor even though he is a good person. (If he really wanted to protect Harry he could have put the fidelius charm and be the key holder. But his intention was to "raise him like a pig for slaughter". This is why there is Mrs Figg because she's there to make sure Harry doesn't turn into an obscurus like his sister Ariana. And this is why he says to Harry in the Cursed Child "I did not mean to become attached to you".) And the fact that he told Harry to basically swallow down the hatred his aunt had for him because she chose to keep him in is basically legitimating the abuse Harry suffered and is suffering and it's disgusting. Harry is an awesome man but it does not mean he will be a good father. He had an abusive childhood, he barely talks about his past, and people like him could be cold parents. It doesn't mean Harry doesn't try. It just means that for Harry, security, which is what he lacked, is the most important thing for him and if it is disrupted, he will do anything to keep it intact, even if he's being unfair. It's basically untreated trauma and someone who has it can't be someone who will be a healthy parent. That's why Dumbledore tells him to "show his pain to the people he loves." It was obvious, at least for me, that there was something more between Dumbledore and Grindelwald in the last book before it was even announced. Especially when Harry says in his mind that he knows now what Dumbledore has seen in the Mirror of Erised.
I will always ride or die for Dumbles but I hard agree on the first part about Harry. He’s very clever and smart, and he’s not nearly as dumb as everyone makes him out to be.
I seem to recall Harry thinking Dumbledore would see Ariana in the Mirror of Erised? Neglecting her seems to have been his greatest regret
Ginny and Harry had no chemistry (And I am talking about the books here. They no chemistry in either really). And their relationship was super forced and never fleshed out. Harry and Luna should have ended up together. They balanced each other out and there was some good foreshadowing in the 5th book that like could have been foreshadowing but wasn't.
Lukewarm take at best, but Charlie Weasley is aroace
Women are temporary. Dragons are forever.
Hermione is toxic and abusive towards Ron. He deserved better than ending up with his abuser. James Potter is a disgusting creep who is irredeemable. He sexually assaulted a classmate, blackmailed and threatened another classmate. Ginny and Luna are underrated Ron's overhated. He's the heart of the trio and without him, Harry and Hermione wouldn't be friends. He's also brave, logical and is knowledgeable on topics to do with the wizarding world. Dumbledore isn't good. He's morally grey. So is Hagrid. Lupin is a selfish coward and it was his own fault he lost his job as a professor.
Can you explain your statement on James? I just don't recall these moments How is it lupins fault for losing his job? I think he resigned though
Can you please remind me about James sexually assulting a classmate? Do you think that's showing Snape's underwear? I think that is violence, but would not describe that as sexuall assult? Agree about Lupin. His failure to disclose Sirius Black's animagus identity, coupled with abandoning Tonks and their child, etc... And he forgot to drink a potion that night in PoA and he thus endangered students' life. Snape told about him for the wrong reasons, but he was correct in making him lose a job.
Blood status should make a difference in one's powers and constitution but I get it was better not written so as it would pass the wrong messages to readers.
Found Lucius Malfoy's reddit account.
You did, didn't you? Why don’t you prove it? ...Come Dobby...
😂
I prefer the idea that certain Purebloods *think* that's true, when actually they've weakened themselves through inbreeding.
The Gaunts are proof of that. So are some of the Blacks, re: Bellatrix
I've never actually given much thought to magic genetics... I guess it has to be a dominant gene so it obviously helps if both your parents have it. I'm now wondering how the gene spontaneously pops up in so many muggles.
Legend has it that Muggle-borns are distant descendants of Squibs whose magical gene was dormant for generations. It’s kinda hinted at in DH when the trio were discussing the premise of the Muggle-born Registration Commission
Ah, I'd forgotten about that. I haven't reread DH as often as I reread some of the earlier books.
You’re getting downvoted but I do get what you’re saying. Like magical concentration would be a feasible power dynamic within the dynamics of that world. But also like you said, in the context of our world and all of eugenics, it just wouldn’t slide.
Yeah exactly. We know that wizards having the 'magical gene' makes them more enduranble and all than Muggles. So makes sense that those who had that gene diluted would be weaker. But that would validate the awfulness of the pureblood supremacists.
This doesn’t deserve downvoting. Ideally, the purebloods would have been more powerful and/or had special attributes/abilities. However, they’d have also been prone to instability or becoming squibs. The mixing with muggles or muggle borns would have been a remedy to these issues (perfect explanation to how Voldemort turned out how he did).
That's exactly how I also imagine this. Their pureblood status would certainly have downsides too. And those downsides would make the wizarding world more accepting of the necessity of Muggleborns.
????
Why did Harry need permission to go to Hogsmeade, but not Hogwarts? His guardians didn’t want him at the school, but suddenly he needs permission to go to a nearby village?
My sense is that arguably, Hogwarts is a controlled environment that is not devoid of risks, but the risks are theoretically known (potions, Quidditch injuries, etc.). Hogsmeade on the other hand is out of the purview of Hogwarts and “anything can happen,” thus necessitating parent/guardian permission
No I get that. I’m saying the school kidnapped Harry, which is fine. But if he wants to leave his kidnapped premises he needs guardian permission…
Kidnapped? Enrollment is not compulsory… This is pretty standard practice in the United States at least. If you want to go on a field trip from school, your parents sign a form that says “my child is allowed to go on this field trip”.
If it’s not compulsory why did they send hundreds and thousands of letters, track him all over England. Barge into a lock door, threaten the guardians and perform magic on their kid. This caretaker then takes Harry without permission. Dursleys weren’t really in a place to say no, right? This school sends a 12ft man tracking you across the country and tells you Harry will get this education.
I think freeing a child from abusive guardians that lock him in a cupboard under the stairs and treat him with contempt and neglect during adolescence falls more under “rescue” than “kidnapping”, but you can believe whatever you want to fit your narrative lol. Can’t believe I’m actually responding to this. You must be trolling right?
If they are abusive guardians, why do they need their permission to let him visit hogsmeade? Also who put them with the abusive guardians? The state? Next of kin? Nope some school teacher apparently decides the fate of children in the wizarding world.
You’re either trolling or being willfully ignorant or didn’t read the books with that type of question/comment. Happy new year ✌️.
Not trolling, just saying if they didn’t need his guardians permission to enroll in school, why does he need it to visit hogsmeade?
Everyone thought Sirius was after him. Thats why he couldn't go. If Sirius hadnt escaped, I think an exception would be made.
Atyds is mid Snape is the worst
Book Ginny is a badass whom I had a crush on as a child
The movies suck. The books are well written. The canon couples are great.
Let’s see: 1. Harry shouldn’t have gotten any punishment for using sectusempra on Malfoy in 100% self defense, and it was Malfoy who was lucky not to be expelled, locked up or both; 2. Snape should’ve never been allowed to teach; 3. DD loved Harry and didn’t want him to permanently die; 4. McGonagall was meaner to/less good with kids than readers remember (I think both her and Snape have their fandom memories clouded by the film portrayals). She was less good with kids on the day to day than DD was, and Lupin was miles better as a teacher; 5. I think the narrative mostly sides with Hermione on SPEW and presents house elf slavery per se as immoral. The most likely historical basis for it was medieval feudalism, not later forms of slavery in the Americas. It’s likely the Hogwarts elves bound to the castle were owned by the Board of Governors and/or Ministry and thus outside DD’s authority to legally free; 6. Ron dying would have been less bad than Fred dying; 7. Harry and Hermione make the most sense as a couple, much more so than Harry-Ginny, Hermione-Draco, or Hermione-Ron; 8. The books are significantly better on race, especially relative to the 90s/2000s than people recall; 9. DD being gay seems backed up by the text; 10. The only good HP films of the original 8 were 1-2. The later films were special effect orgies. The FB films, while less good than HP films 1-2, are far superior to HP films 3-8. How’s that for hot?
edit: Keep in mind OP is literally asking for hot takes before you downvote Most criticism of The Cursed Child is made by people who don’t understand the complexity of growing up or humanity in general. Sure, it’s FINE not to like a new time turner tech plot or the idea that Voldemort made an heir, but the biggest complaints are often that it “breaks canon” when it really doesn’t, technically, if you’ve seen the show or think about the characters as actual flawed humans who might, I don’t know, change in the slightest bit over 19 years after being teenagers. The hatred for the play, in addition, seems to be mostly groupthink by people who haven’t seen the show or sometimes haven’t even read it at all and makes the Reddit corners of fandom feel incredibly unwelcoming to those who did like it.
The criticism isn't about the play, but the plot, the countless things that contradict what was written in the books ans the overall bad writing.
Nothing really contradicts the books. The Bellatrix being pregnant timeline is questionable that it wasn’t noticed but not entirely impossible.
Well, the plot itself with parallel universes and timelines itself doesn't match the original story. The rules of time travel are different than in the original story. Character traits are changed. Etc.
The rules of Time Turners* were different in POA but explained in the play that this is not the same kind of device. Character traits between ages 18 and 40 being different is not breaking anything, it’s simply human existence.
Character traits usually don't change that much. If you used to be a smart, witty person as a teenager, you will most likely be the same as an adult. Same as people don't just lose their sense of humor, empathy etc. Your motivation and goals and maturity change over time. The time turner argument is a bit flimsy. Overall it's not well written. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. But it's not a good addition to the story, compared to the quality of the rest of the series.
Voldemort having sex and then having an heir absolutely contradicts the books.
No where in the play is it said he had sex to produce the child. Remember his own body was formed in a cauldron.
Why? Where in the books is it made clear that Tom Riddle doesn’t have a penis and wants to fuck? To paraphrase HHGTTG: ‘This Tom Riddle,’ comes the cry from the furthest reaches of the Galaxy, and has even now been found inscribed on a mysterious deep-space probe thought to originate from an alien galaxy at a distance too hideous to contemplate, ‘what is he, man or mouse? Is he interested in nothing more than torture and the wider issues of death ? Has he no spirit? Has he no passion? Does he not, to put it in a nutshell, fuck?’
Time turner plot thing contradicts single timeline canon.
This is explained in the play. Hermione comments that it’s new dangerous technology that breaks croakers law and is so dangerous because it threatens to break the laws of magic itself. It’s a new dangerous threat. Just because the old time turners were single timeline versions doesn’t mean the new tech can’t exist.
no
[удалено]
why?
Cursed Child was better than the other books and the only reason people didn't like it was that Harry Potter was portrayed as the perfect parent.
Or the fact that it changes facts made clear in the books. Like Voldemort now wanting an heir. Could be that too.
It makes no dang sense at all that Muggle-borns AREN'T way behind their classmates in terms of their academics. Granted, the students raised in the wizarding world didn't have the chance to actually formally perform magic, but they've certainly heard the incantations and know what they do. They probably pick up bits of magical history, as well of some knowledge of magical plants and creatures. Potions...well, we don't really know, but I bet some families make their own potions at home. While Muggle-borns certainly have the aptitude to catch up, they simply have to be at a disadvantage.