‘Why I hate Harry Potter’. I have to confess that I agree with Robert Winder on this completely. While I’m all for anything that encourages people to read, I’d much rather read something good, myself. Yes, I’m a curmudgeonly old fart, I admit. I also hate trash TV and almost all advertising and become irritated quite quickly with hype of every kind. Maybe I should go and live in a cave.
Yeah! And who tried to teach me English? That comment (your stupid) could have been for anyone. Not you nessecerily. your reaction was uncalled for. Ohh and Harley is a liar. He says “but after he killed Dumbledore – and he didn’t just kill him, he promised to kill him if Draco couldn’t, or he’d die – the idea of him really being a good guy in secret is beyond stupid” on Friday, 8th June, 2007, 2:47 pm.
I’d also like to say, remember that post where I predicted that in the last book, Snape and Voldie would die, and I guessed that Snape would pull a good guy turn? See how I was right? on Friday, 16th May, 2008, 12:58 am. Contradictory anyone?
In retrospect, I really wish I’d just stopped reading the books at the exact moment when Harry died. I just kept thinking, it’s gotta get better, there’s no possible way I could hate Harry any more…
And then came the Brady Bunch ending.
This is the story… of an emo wizard…
Who multiplied faster than bunnies and wound up with approximately twenty children, all named after various dead people…
2000-2010 was totally the Harry Potter decade. Muahahahahaha.
Sorry to post again so soon, guys, but I’d just like to say one thing.
I think the most unfortunate thing about this page is that we only get to see the messed up Harry Potter fans.
Don’t get me wrong. I still hate Harry Potter. I always will, unless I am hit by a train and have a complete personality switch or something. But the thing is, some of my best friends, some of the nicest people I know are Harry Potter fans. They know I don’t like the books, and they don’t shove them down my throat or yell “your stupid” or spend hours explaining the merits of the kid who lived. I’ll bet everybody here knows at least one of those people. They’re the kind who stick to harryrules.org or whatever the website is/websites are and don’t come trolling hate pages. I guess what I’m trying to say is…
Harry-Haters will always hate. Harry-Lovers will always love. Can we please at least pretend we’re adults and return to our own respective pages?
Thanks.
I agree entirely with C.U. (and Anne). Whereas Terry Pratchett wrote a world with such plausibility that you can purchase actual maps of Ankh-Morpork (and The Disc, Lancre and Death’s Domain) and could practically navigate the city with them, Rowling wrote up a world with so many plotholes that you can use it as a bloody fishing net.
The more I read about Harry Potter, the more I think, “This guy is such a Mary Sue.” The rules don’t apply to him. He’s SPECIAL. Now a hero does have to be special in some way (even the idiot hero Phillip J. Fry from Futurama was his own grandfather) but just look at Harry. If your Original Character can do even one third of the things he can do they would be considered a Sue. But because Rowling’s books are ‘official’ because she wrote them, he’s just special.
He’s such an elitist jerk. You see, in a Sue fanfic, any character the author doesn’t like is made to look bad by drawing attention to any flaws the Sue has (which are never addressed nor do they impair Sue anyway).
In Harry Potter, anybody who draws attention to Harry’s lazyness, his arrogance, his belief that he is always right… is portrayed as a jerk. Harry gets these ‘feelings’ and ‘suspiscions’ about various characters and he’s right so often that he makes me wanna puke.
Characters are primarily made to look bad by being jerks to Harry, and it’s only after they’ve been jerks to Harry is it that they can be prats to his backup. Not that Harry really looks any better because it’s hardly like he’s mature enough to withdraw himself from such an argument. He’s just as likely to pull his wand.
He’s such an uninteresting person. All the stress he goes through is never expanded on. Being treated like a slave by his aunt and uncle has no permanent emotional impact – it neither makes him stronger, nor breaks him. It just makes him a martyr. And then he goes to Hogwartz and apparently forgets all about them.
In fact, everything unpleasant that happens to Harry, while it is a perfectly okay reason to have an unhappy history in any story, is portrayed by Rowling so poorly that he always looks like a martyr.
I personally invented a character who was abandoned at birth. But she didn’t become a martyr for it. In fact, her history was, for her first 14 years, tough but character building – her upbringing had a real impact on her life. It was a period of intense pain in her teen years that broke her down into an angry and harsh person. She was brought up to be cold and tough from her school upbringing.
Your upbringing should influence the person you become, but it never does with Harry. It just tries to make me feel sorry for him, but I don’t feel sorry for him because everything turns out freaking perfect at school anyway.
To Harley – What plot holes? can you elaborate?
well today Pottermore was announced, apparently a website dedicated to all things Potter. Now those of us who were hoping that after the final movie, it would all be over, My god it never will be, there was so many times this website could be launched. but no, it seems Potter will be forced into our lived for many more years to come
hah! gr8 is’nt it?
What, what Rowling was trying to be? I was looking the books over in the library the other day, and it occurred to me how much they aspire to be big-time Terry Pratchett knock-offs, especially with the endless name puns. What, a bad guy who seems to be killing the hero’s mentor? Let’s name him Snape… hahaha, it sounds like Snake!
Or “Remus Lupin.” I kind of wanted to dig my brains out with a spoon after I heard that one. What can we possibly do to suggest wolves more? I’ll bet his middle name is Wolfgang or Wolfram or Dances-With-Wolves or something like that.
so anne – you hate the book even WITHOUT reading it!!!!!!!! IDIOT. other wise you would have known its john.everyone realised Lupins secret only AFTER poa. it was a ‘oooh’ moment.
Nah, I’ve read it… them… whatever you call those large hunks of tree flesh gifted to me by a misunderstanding family. Perhaps you might actually READ the page before commenting?…
Thank you for the information. Must not have been a particularly “ooh” moment… and according to my confused google search, POA is a type of grass from the bluegrass regions. Not sure what you’re talking about.
And anyway, it doesn’t really matter what his real name was, does it? For the last four or five books or however long he was present, he was mostly called “Remus Lupin.” If I insisted everyone call me Bjorn the Barbarian, would it matter what my real name was? …at least until they check me into a mental institution. 🙂
But anyway, I happened to stumble across a local Catholic magazine while sorting through some recycling the other day, in which Harry is compared to Jesus. Apparently “he understands that material possessions do not equal happiness and thus fights against the forces of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.” I thought religious people hated Harry Potter?
I’m so glad I have found this site. I have unfortunately surrounded myself with people who love Harry Potter and assume that liking it is default for any teenager. For years, I prayed that the madness would one day stop. But alas, it’ll never, what with the milking way of J.K.Rowling. She has apparently said that she considered writing another book.
Even though I agree with all the criticism people have commented on here about Harry Potter, I still have a few things which I detest about HP that nobody here has discussed.
1. I don’t understand the villain- Voldermort and his rise to power at all. By the end of Book 7, it’s become clear that he has done all those terrible things to avoid death. If he just feared death, why didn’t he just go on a quest of immortality alone? Wouldn’t it draw less attention to himself? Why would he want an entire army after his behind while he’s scared shitless of death? RIDICULOUS. Not to mention that he didn’t know of the Deathly Hallows’ existence, thus tried making Hocruxes. How could someone so hellbent on living forever not do the research? Dumbledore and Grindelward both had, so it must not have been impossible.
I don’t buy that he particularly believes in all the Pureblood above all crap either, especially since he himself is in fact a Halfblood.
How could he preach that inane crap to serve an entirely different end? Who could have believed him? Even if the Purebloods themselves wanted to wipe out the Muggles, why did they deem him their leader?
He seemed downright stupid in the novels. I’m appalled that J.K.Rowling called him as something of a magic’s master. Every time he failed, he seemed bowled over, unable to comprehend why his plan fell apart. Not to mention the end, when he died, because get this: he COULDN’T DEDUCE the true master of the Elder Wand.
Anyone with a brain and half would say EFF this, I’m not following this senile maniac. Yet, had he had no loyal follower, he would in no shape or form come back like he did in all those books. Really, he lived on the backside of some dude’s head, then needed Wormtail to resurrect his body etc. Even if the Death Eaters feared him, they could have clearly seen his decrepit state and concluded that he was not as mighty as thought.
Not to mention, he’s done nothing but terrorize them. I can’t for the life of me understand how he earned himself an army.
2. Even though the entire point of the war was the differing opinions on Muggles, we had very vague idea about the wizards/witches- Muggles relation.
In fact, OBSERVE: we have NO MUGGLE character who is actually likable. In fact, the Dursleys, who despicably abused the hero, are the only notable muggles in the story. The two Squibs (Filch and HP’s smelly neighbor) both turned out to be senile, unlikable- no redeeming characteristics at all.
Basically, characters in HP all look down upon Muggles, seeing the lack of magic as a handicap. The only difference is that the evil ones don’t have self-righteousness to take pity on them.
I find this attitude incredibly detestable. The Light side see the Muggles as their charity case and the Death Eaters as the evils to conquer. Other than themselves, they don’t think of anybody as HUMAN BEINGS.
A hilarious instance is the time he and Hermione had to teach Grawp, Hagrid’s half brother, manners. Even though Hermione herself for the entire book has been preaching about fighting for House Elves’ rights. She shuddered in horror at the thought of helping a half-giant function in the world. The Glorious Trio also quit Care for Magical Creatures as soon as they were allowed to. Quite hypocritical when the novels drone on and on about tolerance and equality. Nobody as a matter fact gave a shit about magical creatures.
3. Harry Potter himself captures and epitomizes this sickeningly condescending attitude so well. Even though he arrives from as a mistreated orphan, he didn’t have any problem looking at people as the decorations for his awesomeness at all. He treated Ron as his sidekick and Hermione as a almanac. Yet as soon as he doesn’t agree with them, he went off on a tantrum, full of banalities like: “they don’t know what it feels like, they don’t understand how he is the way he is, his trials and tribulations, even though he did nothing but got born”. Yikes!
I have to admit I quite liked the first few movies. They dazzled me. So when I tried reading the book, I was quite appalled at how ill Harry often thought of everybody, not just his enemies, but also his friends. He seemed to think them pitiful, even if he didn’t directly say so. He noticed the pathetic quest for fame and acknowledgement in the Weasley clan and seemed more or less looked down upon them. Like the time Mrs. Weasley announced the promotion of her husband in book 6, Harry noted that she must have made small talks only to let out that bit of information. Whether he explicitly stated so or not, I always got the vibe that he found them a bit disdainful. Yet, he still wanted them around. Why?
Ron admittedly made him look really good in comparison. Despite his mediocre grades, Ron was always beside him with worse results. Hermione doesn’t count, cause she’s Hermione. The walking almanac. Occasionally he got to lavish his inherited wealth on his poor friend. I don’t call this tolerance, acceptance in friendship or whatever, I call this condescension. We respect our friends and from times to times have them challenge us. Harry does neither.
Why should he? He’s better at magic, at Quidditch, at popularity, just better than Ron. When he seems wrong, he’s just misunderstood. All shall be resolved by the end of the book.
Anyone who keeps people around for the sake of decoration like he does comes off as pathetic to me.
Had he accepted Draco’s friendship offer in book 1, we would have seen a relationship in which two people could probably challenge each other.
Nobody gave him a slap and tell him to grow up. That was my problem. Who doesn’t think their younger self is a bit dumb? Not Harry. He was the hero from birth.
4. The only redeeming point is the backstory of his parents. Nobody was Sue. Except for Lily Evans, who was so Sue her Sueness carried on to Ginny Weasley.
I mean I’m glad that James and Sirius were both bullies. That sounds incredibly believable that they were both jerks. One died. And the other lived in agony before dying. I feel horribly vindicated by that. No matter how well liked they were as people, nobody excused their behaviors. James’ walking all over Wormtail got him walked over in return. Sirius’ mistreatment of Kreacher got himself killed. Maybe that’s fair. But at least that’s life.
Oops, I meant “maybe that’s not fair”.
Damn, my grammar has abandoned me a few hours after my bedtime. Oh well, writing that was incredibly cathartic.
welcome to the club K, also thought I’d post this little gem i found on cracked
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-ways-new-harry-potter-thing-will-be-immediately-ruined/
definitely made me smile xx
You know I’ve always wondered what Nick Jordan the owner of this blog thinks of all these comments? the fact that his blog became the outlet for our opinions?
Jessica: I love the fact that I’ve managed to stir up a good discussion, and I’m very happy to host it all.
That’s good to know Nick. On the Internet. every website that has ever criticized the books has immediately been spammed or attacked. this is the only one where people can (or try to anyway) have a decent debate
Whoa… we’re debating? I thought in general everybody here hated HP…
This whole Harry Potter debate can be summed up very simply with the definition of “muggle” and how it is applied to oneself by Harry Potter readers. Muggle is defined by the Urban dictionary as: “A person who possesses no magical skills or abilities (originated from the ‘Harry Potter’ novels)”. Judged solely by the fact that fans use the term as an insult shows a major bias in perception that colors their entire view of the series. Are Harry Potter fans incapable of recognizing that they are, in fact, muggles (as defined by J. K. Rowling)? That shows something is very, very wrong from page one. With that huge bias coloring their vision, it’s all downhill from there. Personally, my only claim to non-mugglehood is the belief, heart and soul, in the magic of great fiction and Harry Potter fails miserably from the start. The only explanation for the aggrandizing of this body of work I can come up with is that Babyboomers have somehow elevated themselves (and their kids) above the rest of the human race–that puts them on the inside of the joke that muggles are stupid. With J.K. Rowling calling her readers stupid, pretty much on the first page; why is it that fans didn’t seem to mind? And how did her readers respond? By handing Rowling a billion dollars. Which leads me to wonder who really are the stupid ones?
I should also add that starting her series off with an insult doesn’t exactly reflect well on her sensibilities. Rowling may be rich but I’ll never admire her as a person.
Cindy, I agree with you. I don’t understand why Harry Potter fans believe that they can insult other people for being “Muggles”. Does the fact that they like Harry Potter make them not-Muggles somehow?
The entire series implies that Muggles are inferior and need to be protected from the truth of the magical world’s existence. Honestly, in the context of the story, I find the attitude incredibly condescending. Everyone in this fictional world seems to treat humans with no magic and magical creatures who aren’t purely human like some animals or pets. You know how you want to take care of your cat but would never really treat him/her as an equal? Yup. Pretty much how Harry and Co. think about Muggles, even though quite a few of them popped out of Muggle parents.
We should also consider the fact that the entire banking world is almost exclusively run by Goblins for some reasons, reminiscent of any racial stereotype in the real world? Or all of them? In fact, by including one magical creature after another in her books, J.K.Rowling kept reinforcing some sorts of stereotypes which might seem innocuous to people who don’t read into this beyond its fictional surface but utterly horrid to someone who see this series as an allegory. Seeing as the author and her self-inserted Hermione spent so much time prattling on about equality for magical creatures and Muggles, I don’t think it’s stupid for anyone to interpret the series as an allegory about racism, which manages to be incredibly racist at the same time.
If you just think about it, all of the characters who get some sort of development are wizards and witches, with no exception. Those who don’t tick both the “human” and “magical” boxes, get the roles of plot-devices and then get tossed aside (Dobby anybody? He pretty much exists to demonstrate what a wonderful person HP is for having made a friend in an elf. If only we could all be like him, the world would be a much better place etc) (I’ve already mentioned the utter condescension toward all Muggles in these books. Yes, the wizards fight to protect Muggles from genocide, but all of the Muggle characters in the books are horrible human beings) . That’s the equivalent of a book about racism in America with only white people as the main characters.
Furthermore in the 5th book, Umbridge, who has no redeeming quality as a character, pretty much gets raped by a group of centaurs. Since J.K Rowling has extensive knowledge on myths, she must’ve known that having Umbridge left in the forest with centaurs can only mean one thing. In the aftermath, Umbridge is seen by Harry and Co. to be lying on the hospital’s bed and appearing insentient in every way except for when one of them makes “clip-clopping noises” and sends her into panic. That’s clearly a sign of trauma. Yet, Hermione Granger, who must have known about the centaurs’s reputation as rapists, left Umbridge alone in the forest and then laughed at her in the hospital. The horrible implication here is that if you’re a bitch you deserve to get raped.
The more I see HP as a literary text, the more horrified I become. It only gets away with all of the offensiveness by disguising it in the fantasy genre conventions. The fact that HP fans take so much delight in insulting people by the term “Muggle” should tell you the extent of negative effects the series’ popularity have on people, which might not appear very visibly at the moment but runs deep nonetheless. Even if you ignore the stupidity because of the mere fact that everybody’s a Muggle, the act itself still has a racist undertone. They do have “Mudblood” for the equivalent of a racial slur, but do people really need a racial slur to make a comment racist? If someone used the word “Asian” as an insult as though being Asian is the worst thing in the world, any Asian would probably feel very offended.
I’d not take HP so seriously but for its popularity, which irks me for reasons beyond its utterly demoralizing mediocrity. I have seen people defending J.K.Rowling’s decision to have Umbridge raped and even taking satisfaction in it because of how much they dislike Umbridge. JC, that sort of thing is dangerous and yet condoned by HP fanatics. They have pretty much outright stated that raping is okay if you’re that much of a terrible person just for the sake of winning arguments.
I have yet to mention my suspicion that J.K.Rowling knows of all the subtext here but has a very unapologetic attitude about it. In the 5th book, while Hermione spent the a large portion in the beginning and the middle preaching about not treating magical creatures like objects or servants but rather like fellow beings, the idea of interacting with Grawp (Hagrid’s half brother) horrified her. She then gave up on Care for Magical Creature as a legitimate subject in the 6th book. As I’ve said, J.K.Rowling gets away with it, so why should she feel sorry? Which kinda makes her evil in my book.
I’ve messed up the final paragraph. It goes like this:
“I have yet to mention my suspicion that J.K.Rowling knows of all the subtext here but has a very unapologetic attitude about it. In the 5th book, while Hermione spent the a large portion in the beginning and the middle preaching about not treating magical creatures like objects or servants but rather like fellow beings, the idea of interacting with Grawp (Hagrid’s half brother) horrified her. She then gave up on Care for Magical Creature as a legitimate subject in the 6th book. Even J.K.Rowling doesn’t seem stupid to miss the hypocrisy here. But as I’ve said, she gets away with it, so why should she feel sorry? Which kinda makes her evil in my book.”
Ahahaha…hoh, my god. I think what I find, at once, so hilarious and yet so, so sad is the people who’ve been coming back OVER THE LAST 6 YEARS to cry moar about how undeserving Harry and Rowling are of their fame. Harley? It’s easy to see why you’d be bitter over “All [Rowling’s] Money” while your own scribblings are likely being used as toilet paper as I type this, but little advice? However poor she was when she started out, and whatever she did to climb to the top, I’m thinking that endless whiny bitching about the suckitude of other novels’ lead characters probably wasn’t a big part of it. K, Cindy, C.U., everyone else? I’m so glad I have permission to call you stupid, because I can’t really think of any other way to describe your general arguments. HP is soooo banal and dumb and inconsequential, so much so you just HAVE to rant about Harry and Ron for years on end, in minute detail that blatantly shows you not only read the books carefully, but got so into it that you went looking for fanfic? Yeah, way to convince anyone that this series isn’t worth spending any time on.
And this is the only place you lot can find like-minded opinions on the series? Well actually, no this is good, best to keep the wank and idiocy contained to one spot and all.
Clearly, you’ve already been proven wrong yet again on this, but: yes, what DOES it say about the impact and content of a book they had to split into TWO movies to tell the full story?
With the amount of simple concepts that apparently “make no sense” to a lot of you make me wonder that you’re able to type at all….but let’s start with Quidditch as a school sport. Yes, superior brooms help. But it’s mentioned often that before Harry, Charlie Weasley was the star Seeker who’d win the Cup for Gryffindor. So what, you think the famously poor Weasleys spent their life savings on a state-of-the-art broom for ONE of their sons? or did the other three teams throw away any brooms that were better than one a Weasley could afford? Because most people with any reading comprehension would just assume that brooms AREN’T a determining factor in winning Quidditch games. Which the 2nd book proved too, since Harry caught the Snitch even though Draco was on a better broom.
It’s also funny that teachers being able to favor the students they like with more points is okay with you, but points won in an evenly-played game between the students counting toward the House Cup is what you think skews the competition. Really?
I can’t even with the moron who whined about Harry being lucky he didn’t impregnate Ginny, I’m so sick of all the slut-Ginny bullshit. Find me a passage where Ginny so much as took her top off with Harry before saying idiotic shit like that, so I can at least assume you know how to count to ten. That, coupled with the typical “WAAaahh, Harry/Rowling is teh suXX0rz for hating Slytherin it’s sooo not cool that Slytherins are all ev0l!!11” butthurt pretty much slams the door on my taking any of you seriously. Um, if Harry judges people on the basis of their being a) bigoted/racist fuckwits, b) gloating over the deaths of his loved ones, c) abusing him for the epic crime of existing, d) plotting to kill people, e) all of the above — well, more power to him. I’ve seen more whininess, stupidity, judgmental arrogance and general asshattery in the last 16 posts here than I saw from Harry in all seven books combined, which just confirms to me that Rowling had a mark and aced it when it comes to his characterization, only he’s actually pulled off being engaging and admirable at the same time. (Might want to take notes, Harley, especially if you’re going to use that female OC you mentioned earlier. The description alone set off my gag reflex.)
Gia I did a little calculation. This discussion started back in 2005 July, but let’s just say it was 2006, which means it has indeed been going on for 6 years. There are 174 posts in the discussion, INCLUDING those of HP supporters like you coming here to personally attack those who hate the series. In average, a post gets published every 12,5 days. Meaning every 2 weeks or so, someone type out 3 or so paragraphs to contribute to the discourse or defend his/her argument. In the days and ages of Internet communication, I’d hardly call that a drastic measure from HP haters’ part to express our opinions. Furthermore, and I don’t want to make you gasp, there exist a lot of people who hate Harry Potter and Potterheads with a burning passion that have never visited this site or posted here. You can find them on Facebook, Tumblr etc.
Sure. After 6 years, you’d think most people would have moved on. But you see, the world haven’t moved on the Harry Potter fad so why should us move on from our hatred? Even though I can’t speak for others, I hate Harry Potter consistently, which means that despite wanting fervently to forget all about the books’ existences I will hate them whenever I think of them. So as long as you keep yapping about how much everyone must love Harry Potter and that those hate the whole thing should shut up, I (and many others) will continue to hate it expressively.
Gia, like someone before must have said, many other Potterheads have already attacked us for giving “too detailed” analyses on why we hate Harry Potter. They too have implied that those posts proved that we are obsessed with and/or jealous of J.K.Rowling. It seems obvious to me that you can’t hate Harry Potter because if you:
1. don’t care for the books, have never read them or seen the films, have no intention to and simply crunch your nose up in disgust at the mania surrounding the series, you’re an ignorant asshole who hate for no good reason.
2. have read the books, seen several of the films and can cite logical and well-researched reasons why you hate them and think they have terrible influences on the readers, you’re obsessed with the series and have no life.
Potterheads have created a cult for themselves by constantly trying to tear down those who don’t like Harry Potter, don’t admire J.K.Rowling as an author and dare to speak out as opposed to silently suffering the horrible fad and letting everybody else enjoying themselves in blissful ignorance. Before Gia even began to address our arguments, she had already managed to insult our intelligence, common sense and the lack of faith/love we had in her God- J.K.Rowling.
In the last 16 posts that you find so disgusting, the authors, including me, have made many points worth addressing, but you have only touched only 4 of them, none of which I have made but all of which you have answered with frankly laughable counter-arguments.
1. It does not matter whether the brooms decide the winners in Quidditch or not. J.K.Rowling would have Harry Potter win all the important games anyway. If the brooms were crucial, she’d give him the best one. If not, he’d win some other way. The way J.K.Rowling wrote about Quidditch would pretty much insult any sport fan had it not seemed like a joke, unintentional on her part but nonetheless intentional in the minds of those who want to keep loving Harry Potter and sports at the same time. Just take any serious athlete in high school hoping to become a professional some day. Do you even know how much he/she has to sacrifice and how obsessed he/she is with the sport? And yet, Harry Potter, the legendary Seeker in Hogwarts, certainly good enough to become pro any day, pretty much strutted on the pitch and won the game. He spent most of his time thinking about Voldemort, schoolwork, girls, Malfoy etc before giving Quidditch a few shallow thoughts, which someone who watches the World Cup now and then would give to football. On the other hand, Ron, who has obsessed over Quidditch since birth, only got on the team in book 5 and struggled until the end. Rubbish. I’m not saying that it was Harry’s fault that he didn’t know about Quidditch until Hogwarts and that he didn’t have more time to obsess over it, but if a 11 year old who has never heard of football or watched a game of football learned to play for the first time, he would struggle for a long long while before he could even master the simple techniques, let alone play with older footballers and win the game for them, no matter how much of a natural he is.
2. The entire point system is an illogical plot devise by Ms.Rowling to give Harry some sense of triumph. Every school year, we have 7 different age group attending god know how many classes. In any of those classes, the teachers can give or deduct point from a student’s house for his/her academic understanding and/or behaviors. In fact, with the way McGonagall and Snape did that in Harry’s classes, it seems highly likely that multiple points get added and deducted for two or more houses in every class that takes place (as I remember, a class usually had students from 2 or more houses). This fact renders the whole system inscrutable to students, meaning they can tell at any moment which house has the most points and which has the least but they can’t tell why. Yet HP and Co. had no qualm about proclaiming that they almost came last in the House Cup because “Snape hates us!!!” or because “Harry broke the rule”. Apparently the system doesn’t work when J.K.Rowling isn’t looking or, in other words, where Harry isn’t concerned. Kids who are 2 years below/above Harry, not related to Ron, in Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff just basically did not exist in the series. So points won by Quidditch matches ultimately proves inconsequential if we’re talking about logic. They only acted as plot device for J.K.Rowling to dramatically rescue Harry and Gryffindor from the pit of finishing last in the House Cup.
3. I did not make that slut-Ginny comment and did not see anybody call Ginny a slut. However, having no passage in the books of Ginny taking her top off hardly proves that she did not engage in any sexual act, with or without Harry. J.K.Rowling would never put that in a children book. But do you really believe that Harry Potter, a heterosexual male in his teen years, lived a life so devoid of any sexual thoughts and acts as depicted in the book? Even if he and Ginny did do the deeds, I wouldn’t call Ginny a slut. Please take your argument up with someone who does.
By the way, nice way to sum up our arguments there: “WAAaahh, Harry/Rowling is teh suXX0rz for hating Slytherin it’s sooo not cool that Slytherins are all ev0l!!11″. Let me give it a try with your argument: “WAAAaah, these people h8 Harry Potter. J.K.Rowling is the gr8est EVA. I betta insult dem for thinking of her as GODD!!!1111”
We did not criticize Harry for doing any of the things you list. We criticized him for:
1. being an asshole in general to his friends.
2. whining all the time about his Chosen one-ness, believing that nobody has it tough but him.
3. displaying no personal growth, being bratty, treating people horribly for no reason before they turn out to be the villains by the ends of the books (how convenient).
4. And despite ALL of those things, everyone still looks up to him and hails him as the hero of their time, the epitome of goodness and so forth, making him a Sue as a result.
J.K.Rowling has created an entitled and horrible character that most likely mirrors her unapologetic attitude about her middle class privileges and tried to pass him off as a hero. And she has apparently succeeded because Gia, I don’t know you were born rude or learned it from someone else, but you might as well internalized that sort of behaviors after years of trying to emulate Potter. You had not read a word of Harley’s work and already you are insulting it for the sake of an Internet argument.
I’ll tell you what else sucks about Harry’s personality.
He was brought up by his aunt and uncle, who treated him like trash. His parents were murdered in his youth. But psychologically, he’s barely affected at all. In fact we barely see any effect on his life.
Yes, he wants to destroy Voldemort. But lots of people want that. There is nothing special about that. Why is he capable of making friends normally, and having normal feelings, despite all the emotional abuse he’s gone through? He should be so messed up in the head but he’s not; he’s pretty much fine. He’s so freaking AVERAGE when it comes to psychological trauma, that I feel like he didn’t have anything lousy happen to him at all in his youth.
Also, Sumbledore strikes me as something of a fool. He’s always dragging Harry on these dangerous missions and telling him to do exactly as he’s told, even while at the same time saying “You’re more important.” If Harry is more important, why are you taking him on these missions? Is there nobody else you trust to come along? Somebody less valuble? Somebody a little older and wiser who won’t be psychologically scarred by say, watching you die? Why don’t you explain everything to him if you trust him?
Climb down off the cross before you hurt yourself, K, at this point I’m questioning far more than your ability to count. You’ve got every right to your opinion. I and others have just as much right to find it moronic and hypocritical (although painting them all as Potterheads worshipping “Rowling’s religion” is …so proving them wrong there. No, really), and this is hardly your private rant diary — posting said opinion in a public forum means you’ll likely hear from people who disagree with it. Welcome to the Internet. What I don’t actually have is endless time and word/character space to go through every bit of analysis-fail point by point, which is why I stuck to the four topics
that kept getting recycled. But okay, we’ll do it your way.
1. Let’s leave aside the issue of how it WAS, in fact, Quidditch as a game and the epic unfairness of fast brooms determining a win that was being specifically criticized earlier. I’ll take it on faith that you’re well-read enough to go back and find that post yourself. Rowling has Harry win all the important games, which is why he personally won the Cup for Gryffindor all seven years at school, right? Except for that one time in “Stone”, where Slytherin won the Cup. Oh, and that time in “Azkaban” where he lost the game to Diggory/Hufflepuff. But all the other years, Gryffindor won because of him….hang on, he got kicked from the team after the first game in “Phoenix”, yet Gryffindor still won. Well clearly he used telepathy to guide the Snitch to Gryffindor’s Seeker. Like he must have in “Halfblood Prince”, during the two games he AGAIN didn’t get to play in. I’m bored trying to follow an argument this idiotic – you seem to be equating the facts that we see Quidditch through Harry’s eyes and that he’s got natural talent with the notion that Quidditch exists for the sole purpose of making Harry look/feel good. Completely ignoring the fact that Harry has played in less than half of the games documented in the series, and of those games, you can count on one hand the number of games he’s won through that talent, as opposed to blind luck or distraction tactics. As I’m not Rowling, I have no clue why Quidditch was created the way it was, but even third graders have the ability to see that it holds up reasonably as a game whether or not Harry’s a part of it, and that any of the players, not just the Seeker, can be celebrated as the team superstars (seeing as RON became that superstar often enough in the last books. And Ron waited because a Gryffindor player – Oliver Wood – had to graduate before a spot on the team freed up, I can’t believe that needs to be spelled out).
2. In light of (1), your arguments about the point system make even less sense, because if you feel that the point system is so arbitrary, I can’t see why you take issue with the ONE way students have of influencing its outcome without teacher involvement. Of course the students will gripe that they only lost because this or that teacher hates their House. In Snape vs. The Gryffindors, this is completely true. And do you honestly imagine the Slytherins wouldn’t cry that EXACT SAME THING about Dumbledore after the first book, considering that it’s the literal truth in that case? They did only lose the Cup because Dumbledore favored the Gryffindors and had an excuse to give them extra points, and I don’t see how that indicates the system doesn’t work the same way when it’s not Harry and friends being persecuted. It’s unfair. Breaking news: most school-based extra merit systems tend to be! The Quidditch tournament seems to be a way to counter that, which is more than many real schools can say.
3. Again, I’m putting faith in your ability to go find the “Harry’s a lucky snot to not have become a teenage father, with he and Ginny getting it on every time you turned around” post yourself. People that make up pages which don’t exist for anyone else in a book, clearly got to have SOME special skills. And you’re right, it doesn’t matter whether or not they had sex, as both were hormonal teenagers and it happens. I don’t know a more clear-cut example of ‘acting like humans’ than that right there. Just saying, if one is going to condemn them for acting like hormonal teenagers, one should probably have more than a wild interpretation of “several sunlit days” to back it up.
4. And one more time, go back and read the other posts, I’m sure you’ll find something that criticized him for exactly what I mentioned. Believe me, you lot are far from being the only Slytherfen to entertain people, it’s just the complete lack of ‘getting the point’ here was more pronounced than usual. And Harry’s constantly telling Hermione she’s “incredible” and “brilliant”, that “[he’d] be dead without her.” Sending her out of harm’s way while he goes on to face what he believes is Voldemort. Incessantly encouraging his other friend during those Quidditch trials you mentioned. Handed off his Tournament money to other friends so they could start a business, and then going off to die to give them all more of a chance against Voldemort. My god, what. A. Little. Shit. He. Is. I mean, no one should ever write characters that are as fallible as real people.
5. ”
“Anyone who keeps people around for the sake of decoration like he does comes off as pathetic to me.
Had he accepted Draco’s friendship offer in book 1, we would have seen a relationship in which two people could probably challenge each other.”
I know that’s not a quote from your latest post, but in light of your comment regarding Harry’s treatment of his friends, it deserves a mention for making me laugh. Draco had already insinuated that Harry’s kind didn’t belong at Hogwarts, and then told him he’d die the way his parents did. What a beautiful start they were off to!
Harry Potter is officially over, thanks to both lovers and antis for carrying on with the fever. Way to secure Harry’s place in eternity. Anyways. I am tired of the trope “Harry had a abusive childhood he should be a antihero figure DarkLordPotter” .please people, Dursleys were indeed not the perfect parents, but the were never abusive enough to leave scars forever. They never starved him(ss/ps), got him his first glasses, sent him to school, and there is no canonical evidence to support Vernon or petunia ever beat him. Only Marge would cross the line at times and the durseleys encouraged harry to stay out of her way. In phoenix it was established that Petunia cared for him under every thing. The most imp years while growing up are the teenage years ,which ,Harry spent mostly at hogwarts. And really, Rowling showed that harry had enough moral strength and fibre by not falling into ‘bad childhood anti hero’ cliché . There are a lot of fanfic authors who think they are better than jkr and you can see the result of following this path in das mervin’s sporks of Rose Potter and Holly Potter. And yes, sometimes Harry is a jerk to a lot of people. Were’nt you when you were a teen? Or you are still one and do not know better? You guys are actually trashing a kid for acting like a kid? Really? Quidditch now.
The only time gryffindor won the cup because of Harry was in Azkaban. And every player was important. Gia covered this well actually. And skill. HARRY was good only in quidditch , nothing else . Humans are usually often skilled at a particular something, lucky ones are at more than one. Once again YOU would’nt understand if you aren’t .
The most spotlighted person is indeed Harry, because the books are about him but there are enough info on hufflepufs, ravenclaws, and slytherins if you read without a biasglass
. Primarily the books are escapist literature, thus a wizarding world is indeed glorified.
Muggels are not focused on . One can argue that Dudley redeemed himself, and hermiones parents were ‘good’ characters, but yes there is a condescending attitude towards the muggles, however ,a reading of tales of beedle the bard does justify the bias.
Well. I’ll come back later if there are follow ups . Adieu till then.
Ohh and reading Fantastic beasts and whwre to find them would explain the diff between creatures and beings . Hermy joined the MOM and played active role in changing house elf laws. Talk abt animals rights all you want to, k, wudnt u be scared to face an untraind lion? grawp was a savage GIANT. wanna face one?
I’m quite bored with you 2.
Gia:
1. You’re basically saying that Harry didn’t win every game and didn’t help Gryffindore with every game they won. I know that. I’ve never expected J.K.Rowling to be so obvious. And she was not. The point here is that if there was a game that truly mattered in the book for Harry to win, he’d. And J.K.Rowling as well as you apparently have no insights into the way that sports work. Third graders and the likes of you might think that Quidditch holds up, but any avid sport fans who think about the matter for longer than 2 seconds and feel no fear to interrupt his/her HP loving bandwagon would see the falseness of it. You know what would be realistic? If Harry worked for years before getting on to the team. If he lost games after games after games, some in humiliation. If seeing his ankles and wrists broken would break his heart. If he agonized over Quidditch and let it sabotage his homework, his friendships a little bit before he finally have his sweet victory. Because newsflash: that’s what it’s like for kids in high school/middle school who pursues sports seriously/have talents enough to become pros someday. It’s not fucking “you have a long lost dad who was a star and now you will walk on the field and become a star yourself without even knowing the rules of the goddamn sports”.
2. Did you even get my point? I was saying that it was nearly impossible to assign blames or praises to certain individuals by just looking at the points of each house. The fact that characters do that all the time smacks of illogical plot devices to me. If the system worked all the time, considering the fact points get lost and gained EVERY SINGLE HOUR, how would you know why Gryffindore has A points and not B? Because Harry sassed Snape? What if it was because some kid in Year 1 in Transformation waved the wand the wrong way or something? How in the fresh hell can anybody tell especially at the end of the year why each house has a certain number of points?
3. Don’t put too much faith in me. I’m losing interest by the minute in your ability to cherry-pick obscure arguments in order to rebuke. I didn’t make it. And you still haven’t addressed the ones that I have made.
4. Yeah sure. Because J.K.Rowling thinks that she can write a rude person and still sell him as a hero to worship. It doesn’t take much craft to create a person who would pass for the “nice” test nowadays. But Harry’s still a douchebag. He looked down on Ron’s poverty and generally ineptitude at everything compared to him. He would let Ginny humiliate Ron in front of him. And even though he said nice things to Mrs. Weasley, he secretly felt disdain toward her boasting of Mr.Weasley’s promotion. What do you think that a douchebag would say to someone he used successfully? Huh? “Go away, you’re annoying me”? Harry appreciated Hermione as an almanac. Harry’s not an abomination to human decency, he’s just an average douchebag we see every day in the streets, in the coffee shop, and somehow J.K.Rowling worked him into her novels and asked us to love him.
5. Uh not really. Did you even read the first book? When they first met, Draco clearly offered his friendship only to be turned down by Harry. Once again here, you don’t understand the distinction between what could have happened and what happened. Draco has never considered himself a worshiper of the Chosen One. He had a lot pride himself even in an 11 year old. So obviously J.K.Rowling had slapped upon him the title of an opponent. Ron took Harry’s shit. Hermione took Harry’s shit. But Draco would not, so of course that would hurt her precious little hero. That’s what I was talking about.
Percyfan:
Your comment is highly offensive. And here’s why: there are many people who grew up in an emotionally abusive (not physically abusive) family, having to receive years of therapies to recover. If any of them at the age of 11 has been thrust into a foreign world with the mission of killing the most powerful being of that world, he/she’d not grow up to become a 100% mentally healthy person, let alone a goddamn hero. That’s not because they’re not strong enough. Saying that Harry was strong enough to avoid the “antihero” trap is like saying a crippled man is strong enough to walk without a limp. The man’s not strong. He’s just not crippled as told. The characterization of Harry rings absolutely false and generally ignorant on J.K.Rowling’s part to me.
Yes, many people act like jerks in their teenage years, but others don’t call them heroes. When a 13 year old acts like a jerk, then he/she’s a jerk, not a “hero under too much as the Chosen One”.
Don’t be obtuse. I’ve read the books, and Harry was spectacular at Defense Against Dark Arts, great at Transfiguration and did well at most class, with the exception of Potions even which he had his stint in year 6. Don’t make me scoff. Once again, I know kids with sports talents. They have to work harder than 99% of the academic kids to make their talents shown. That’s just a fact.
You and Gia seem both to content with J.K.Rowling’s halfhearted coverage of people other than Harry. Let’s face it: Ravenclaw, Slytherin and Hufflepuff only exist in relation to Harry. If Harry was year 6, year 3 in the Hogwarts wouldn’t exist. That’s okay really. Except J.K.Rowling intended to build a world for the readers and it collapsed everywhere I cared to looked.
The reason there exists a condescending attitude toward Muggles is that J.K.Rowling herself harbors an condescending attitude toward people who do not belong to her class: white, has college education, living in relative comfort of middle class privileges. She wanted to write metaphorical books to fight racism but ended up betraying her biases. Harry Potter is the fantasy’s equivalent of books about white people solving racism and people of color feeling gratitude toward them.
Am I taking the books too seriously? Not really. Because even though not many people can vocalize this subtext in the books, it affects most of them, especially Potterheads. Wizards and witches in Potterverse fought for Muggles but looked upon the condition of having no magic as lacking and deficient. If that doesn’t reek of ableism then I don’t know what does. Yet people rave about, going so far as using “Muggle” as an insult the way racists would use the N word as a racial epithet.
Giants are magical creatures. And Hermione could not give a shit about the fates of them. She could wail on all day about elves, but at the end of the day she would basically be saying in Muggle language “I want dogs to have great lives, but lions could go extinct because they scare me.” However, considering the context, comparing giants, elves and goblins to animals seem horrifyingly offensive. That would be like comparing the centaurs to horses. They seem on par with human beings as magical beings to me really.
Okay, I will try to counter as much as I can, both mine and Gia’s.
1 Quidditch matters to Harry, true, but not in the way it does to the real sports man Oliver Wood ,or even ron. Both of these had their “If he lost games after games after games, some in humiliation. If seeing his ankles and wrists broken would break his heart. If he agonized over Quidditch and let it sabotage his homework, his friendships a little bit before he finally have his sweet victory.” So that’s realistic right? I understand you have a problem with harry being a immediate success but get this – the 1st book was directed at 9 – 11 year olds, and was basically a fairy tale, Rowling was not even sure that it would sell enough to pay for the publishing cost. Harry was a skimpy, ‘abused’ kid who had his dream come true at hogwarts kind lifestyle. In that book he had everything handed to him in a kid friendly silver platter. So , the first thing he was good at was quidditch. With the popularity of the series, JKR probably realised that kids may get the wrong idea and crated Ron’s passion for the game. And as far as the Broom thing goes, in international compeditions the standards are regulated severely(gof) . only in un important school games better brooms stand a chance. Then again , in a lot of school based competitions rules are twisted right
Read Quidditch through the ages for better understanding.
2. I don’t get this, so no comment, but there are Giant hourglasses mainting the scores. Adding or vanishing number of gems depending on the scores.
3 . same as 2
4. No he is a decent man. Are you saying that one negatory thought nullifies all his good actions like giving his money to Fred George, offering to his his riches with ron countless times, boosting Neville’s courage etc? and Ginny insulted Ron because Ron was being an asshole (we are talking about HBP right?) and deserved it. Again , Idont see why people say he sed Hermione. What would make you believe they were real friends ?
5. Draco first insulted people who had’nt heard of hogwarts before receiving the letter (thus Harry too), then demonstrated general racism to mudbloods, and then insulted Hagrid whom Harry already liked ,and showed 0 sensitivity to harrys dead mom and dad.
I don’t know about you, I’d treat friendship offer from this guy with some reservation.
Now mine.
Your point? Yours are offensive too
Abuse- well then he developed his hero complex because of that. Dursleys trated him with no respect thus at hogwarts he became desperate to show that he mattered and jumped into shit a lot bigger than himself . His mission became killing Voldy only in his fifth year after the said baddy killed his last true family. Going through what he had gone through He didn t need ’therapy’ You cant say anyone dealt with exactly what harry had
So quit whinning about him turning out like that. You know what? I was emotionally abused till I was 14. It was not intentional ,as in India the society is a lot different from the west and perceptions are different, but nobody was ready to understand my side ever. I had to see every one worshipping my little brother , while I was chastised for smallest of mistakes. I became socially awkward and even considered suicide for a while, but I snapped out of it myself without any therapy. Actually my situation was exactly Like HP’s and his escape was my escape too(I Started reading Hp in 2007, when I was !5) .
Emotional abuse does not equal physical handicap in every case allright? It does, at times and at times it doesn’t depending on the degree. Ohh and Harry didn’t remember his parents murder scene before he was 13 . He was unstable and shaky after that.
Hero Harry was not a hero before his final sacrifice and victory. He was a figure whose very existence was unexplainable thus a mystery to the wizarding world. The media called him chosen one or undesirable no1 suiting its own purposes. He was really just a average kid somehow managing to save the day with shitload of help from others.
Yea he was good in DADA thanks to his “un heroic” adventures, but he was exactly like Ron in transfiguration and other subjects. Average at best. And wasn’t the potion thing a cheating that came back and bit him in the ass later?
Halfhearted coverage GODDAMIT the books are based on the life of the TITULAR CHARACTER HARRY POTTER. How would it add to the plot if JKR detailed the lifes of 2nd yr hufflpuff Fay Dunbar or the common room feuds of 6th yr ravenclaws? Then you would whine that yhey contain unnecessary information The books are already fat enough. If you really want to know the wizarding world in more detail, read the associated books or visit pottermore.
condescending attitude . I already said that I agree that it is there. That JKR thing is your opinion ,not a fact. I think the last line refers to Twilight by smeyer. Not HP
Hermione Ohhh I know the difference between creatures and beings . I HAVE read fantastic beasts you see . Have you? Hpverse Giants, centaurs and goblins are strong enough to protect themselves. And are always at war with wizards for power. Hermiones help is not needed by them. Still ,Hermy did try to protect Grawp from centaurs and centaurs from umbridge. Hose elves were the only creatures that needed her help. She would be saying “ I want dogs to have great lives, I need not worry about lions as they CAN FEND FOR themselves.” And of course calling these creatures animals is derogatory. I was just trying to explain it in laymans terms.
I am just saying that you are a hypocrite or a simpleton who doesn’t understand why a 15 year old girl would be scared to face a 16 feet creature reputed to be brutal and blood thirsty who she knows was able to horribly bruise their biggest and strongest friend.
Aaaannndddd I bore you? You don’t you know. I’m actually thankful to you for providing me with a plat form to rant and rave. Thanks.
Here goes:
1. No, I will not read “Quidditch Through The Ages” to see J.K.Rowling’s shallow understandings of sports exposed further. And whatever difficulty which may have presented itself and forced her to write such a hyperbolic and asinine portrayal of Harry’s genius in the game does not negate the fact that said hyperbolic and asinine portrayal exists. Any criticism leveled against it therefore remains valid.
4. Didn’t you read that part where I said that Harry wasn’t an all-out villain peddled as a hero? That he was just an everyday douchebag? I have no problem with a teenage having antagonistic thoughts against his friends, his family, or acting like a douche to look cool. But I do with The Chosen One. There’s nothing extraordinary about Harry. He’s not a hero. And the fact that J.K.Rowling expects us to think otherwise and her attempts to redefine the word “hero” coupled with the grandiose praises of Harry’s goodness that she stuffed in other characters’ mouths bother me very much. Harry Potter has human decency to a point, but not the makings of a hero. The belief that just by being an everyday Joe you can turn into a hero with the right circumstances that the books hinge on is both breathtakingly stupid and dangerous at the same time. It’s stupid because of course real life does not work that way. It’s dangerous because it curses children everywhere with a sense of entitlement: that happiness should come to them if everyday they manage to exert a minimum amount of strength and character to remain “decent”.
5. What part of “the distinction between what happened and what could’ve happened” did you not get? In the context of J.K.Rowling’s writing process itself, it matters not that Draco insulted Hagrid or displayed bigotry. My point was that J.K.Rowling had drafted up a character whose main concern was himself (in other words: something other than Harry and his destiny as the Chosen One), and in putting him in the unsympathetic antagonist bag, she managed to eliminate the most interesting possibility for the series. If she had not decided to do so and instead give Draco and Harry a friendship, there were very simple methods to make Draco a more like prospect for a friend: either make him less than 100% discriminatory or acknowledge that he belongs to a very large population of people who harbor some sorts of bigotry earlier on in their lives when the influences of their upbringings outweigh their independent educations and observations about the world. But she chose neither, and we got stuck with those “either love Harry or go be a villain” books.
6. Nobody needs therapies. Some people who have been emotionally abused choose to have therapies just like some people choose to have ice-cream on certain days, or apply for a job, and so on and so on. Most of the time, the choice you make isn’t mandatory and isn’t a matter of life or death, but you make it because you think it’d improve your life.
Now here’s my point: most people who had suffered through such thorough forms of emotional abuses for years like Harry did have to go through therapies to heal their mental wounds and open doors for satisfying lives in long-term. The fact that Harry acquired no mental issue at all after all those years of having nobody really nurturing him and believing that nobody had given or would give him maternal love rings extremely false. How’s that offensive?
Don’t bring your problem in here, since you did not even care to give a detailed and level-headed description of it. Nobody where I live goes to therapies either, since psychotherapies in the climate of my society seem to many people extremely superfluous and mental illnesses invented. However, I have noticed a lot of mental problems in my acquaintances and friends. My point is you just don’t snap out of mental issues. We might ignore them and pretend that they have gone away. But escapism hardly ever lasts for long.
You bring up the fact that Harry doesn’t seem great mentally all the time. But your observation lacks the fundamental understanding of psychology. Harry’s unstable and shaky periods root in his ability to respond to situations like a normal human being. Mentally healthy people are capable of dark moods. Anyone of them would respond to remembering such grievous memories like the murders of one’s parents by being “shaky and unstable”. However, by the suspicious lack of mental issues in Harry, I was referring long-term problems. None of his problem roots in deep subconscious wounds resulted from his years of emotional abuse. His hero complex seemed largely a non-issue except for in the 5th book where it got Sirius killed. And even if it did have serious consequences, in real life, it’d be the lightest problem in a long list of problems a kid as abused and neglected as Harry was would have.
Am I saying that every person who has ever gone through so much must have more mental issues than Harry? No. Does the fact make Harry’s saneness any less unrealistic and uninteresting? Not really. There were plenty of roads that Rowling could’ve taken to turn Harry Potter into a worthwhile series. This point I’ve just made was just another one of them that she refused to consider.
7. I agree that Harry was just an average kid. But J.K.Rowling clearly tried to sell him as a hero (Dumbledore’s praises of his goodness in book 7, which belong to long list of similar eulogies). Refer to 4 to see why I don’t believe he can be both.
Did you not even read book 6 where Harry and Ron read their report cards for OWLs? Almost in every subject, Harry did as well as or better than Ron. It was a fact that Harry was academically better than Ron.
8. You did not even understand my argument about the point system. I wouldn’t expect you understand this. I have no problem with J.K.Rowling revolving everything around Harry, except loads of books with one main character have well-developed supporting ones too. Harry Potter do not. And the logic within this universe that J.K.Rowling created falls apart whenever someone wants to pick it apart.
9. Yes, lions are dangerous. No, in lots of situations, they can’t fend for themselves. Are you the sort of person who believes that whaling is okay because whales “can fend for themselves”? Species as tough and dangerous as them go out of existences at an alarming rate. That’s why the comparison is apt. Why do you think that Hagrid wanted to teach Grawp human etiquette if he was doing so dandy then? I never said that Hermione wasn’t allowed to be scared. But she did not give a shit, which meant another set of reactions entirely. If she could rid of Grawp that moment, she’d gladly. If I recalled correctly, Grawp never intended to hurt either one of them. But his size posed a huge problem when he moved and therefore Hermione just did not want anything to do with him.
Are you arguing that because goblins, centaurs and giants have enough strength to not need Hermione’s help, she shouldn’t extend her belief in equity to them? That she should only advocate for the rights of elves because they whimper in helplessness instead of going to war with human beings? Because I’m pretty sure that that argument has a horrific racist implication.
Since you brought up Umbridge, she got left by Hermione and subsequently got raped by the centaurs. Here’s another one on her long list of hypocrisies. She preaches ethics, yet left a woman to a bunch of rapist in a forest and later laughed at the woman’s signs of trauma in the hospital. Want another example? Hermione permanently disfigured a girl for ratting out Harry’s club. I’m pretty sure if J.K.Rowling committed to creating a fantasy mirroring real life, that action would be deemed illegal. How’s that for our innocent 15 year old?
Lets set in motion
1. Don’t then. Whatever floats your boat mate. Accept the fact that your knowledge will remain shallow and incomplete. Continue pointing out errors the author tried to rectify. Very mature. A lot of 1st novels of a series has errors that are sought out in later ones HP is not unique. You know what? Now you’ll say that “Harry still has amazing powers that are not fair” , but since you wouldn’t consider the circumstances, nor will I accept that the said skill is unfair lets drop this facet of the debate already. This ones a dead end.
4. EXACTLY. Harry was not a hero at all. He was ,as you say “just an everyday douchebag” and I say a normal kid, the wizarding world and the wizarding media tried to make him one. He loathed this did you even read my arguments? How did you miss the central point of Harry Potter? HE WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE A TYPICAL HERO AT ALL. That’s why a lot of people(obviously not you) can relate to him. No one becomes a hero for surviving . His later course of actions made him one. You call him a jerk, douchbag etc, do point out instances when he acted as one .. And wrong again Harry Didn’t have a minimum character strength he had a lot of it. You point out instances of him as a jerk, and then I too will point out instances of him having the said strength.
5. Draco acts as JKR’s mouthpiece to show us the dark side of her world. Him befriending Harry won’t be unique as you seem to think. There are a lot of Books, TV dealing with the newcomer befriending the rich, cool dark kid and when their interests clash, the newcomer stands up to the other one. Why do you want HP to be nothing else? If it went that way , a lot would still complain as to why Draco was’nt the antagonist from the get go. There’s no pleasing all, so quit whining. How would you feel if I tell you that instead of the points you are voicing start complaining about the witchcraft in HP, or how Harry should have ended up with Hermione, or how Dumbledore is a manipulative bastard lauded as a hero. What it is and what is should be is never a valid argument if what it is makes sense. Did you forget they both saved each others lives in the last book? And tell me – are these villains? Reeta Skeeter, aunt Muriel, Percy Weasley, Mundungus Fletcher, Amos Diggory, Scrimgeour , Ollivander, Mrs Malfoy and most importantly Severus Snape. Why don’t you understand all people are essentially different?
6. NOT THIS AGAIN . you cant get your head around this one can you? I have already shown that he was hardly abused. It was hard for him yes, but think about this, England is a civilized country, if Harry was abused that bad, Dursleys Would have to answer to the police, courtesy of the neighbors. His situation looked worse compared to Dudley’s, who was spoilt bad by his parents. Dumbledore says Harry was a lot better off that Dudley atleast (in HBP). So all your arguments regarding therapy, mental health etc are invalid. But yes this still affected his life. He had no Friends outside of Hogwarts, even at hogwarts he never approached people himself. He was friends with the people who approached him themselves. He so overwhelmingly accepted hogwarts as a home as he felt so sheltered there. You are insulting all orphans right now saying that all of them should have mental issues. Sorry for bringing my cause into this three ring circus of pain, but who are you to say I do not understand psychology, when you are the one who barely understood Harry’s life? Do site examples of HORRIBLE MENTAL/PHYSICAL abuse of Harry like I have sited of not .JKR ‘s road is’nt yours because you aren’t her. HP being worthless is your opinion, Why, I’d beg to differ. And what do you think of Luna? She was motherless too, and quite touched in the head right?
7. NO that’s again your opinion. Mine says Jkr created a character and the readers were free to see him as whatever they wanted to. His state of affairs called for him to do some typical save the day hero stuff , albeit he didn’t want to be one. He still stepped up to the role as he wanted to save everyone around him. You even remember what he had done before that praise scene? Do that, every one will call you a hero too. Clearly you are the one who hasn’t read book 6, as Harry did better than Ron only in his pet subject DADA( of course that’s unfair and undeserving right?) . they both failed the same subjects and both got 7 owls each.1 word . Chess, a game that requires both brain and strategy. Ron was a lot better in it than Harry and even Hermione, that too from the very first book.
8. No, I didn’t and before insulting me , ask yourself if that makes sense anywhere outside your head. Once again , opinion, and stupidity if you are calling Snape,Sirius,Remus,Dumbledor,Neville,Luna, Fred and George Weasley.,hell , even Cedric and Fleur underdeveloped characters. Please show how the world falls apart, don’t tell.
9. Ooooh my mistake . Hermione screaming at the centaurs to not hurt grawp while they were ready to gladly kill her too gave me the idea that she cared enough in spite of being terrified of Grawp too. Don’t misinterpret my words to make me sound like a racist. Hermione cared for all, but extended her support actively to house elves during the course of the books as they needed it most at that time.I know about centaur’s portrayal as rapists in most lores, but why do they have to do anything sexual with Umbridge too? The book said “Nobody really knew what was wrong
with her, either. Her usually neat mousy hair was very untidy and there
were still bits of twigs and leaves in it, but otherwise she seemed to be
quite unscathed.” If she had been gang raped by horses her lower body would have been badly bruised for starters and if you say (ewwwww) oral, her mouth and throat would be badly bruised, and she would have passed out from the thing. Her actions in DH shows she was perfectly normal(I mean for her) going by your own logic, if abuse should have made Harry a nutcase, shouldn’t gang rape put umbridge out of order permanently? And what sort of person are you ,who reads a woman was abducted by some ……… men and immediately concludes ‘ooh ooh gang rape’ in a children’s book ? Have you ever been in England? if you have, or are English yourself you should know this – I lived there for 3 years, and came to know one thing. There sneaking is a bigger crime than stealing and even murder. Those books mirror a lot of trad English society. Rowling is teaching that sneaking is wrong. It can mark you for life. And I love Hermione for these badassness that she shows at times. She is a geeky bookworm, who you really wouldn’t wanna cross. Hypocrisy?
What hypocrisy? Serving just desserts isn’t hypocrisy.
a few other points
Add the name of Aberforth Dumbledore to both the lists i mentioned. As harry constantly demonstrated that he’d perform underage magic if he feels threatened, do you really think Dursley’s wouldn’t think twice before “abusing” him? Innocent? Did I even say that? even if i did, K, are are you saying that those who aren’t ” innocent” by your definition, you’d gladly deny them any rights? WOW!
K, if we’re missing your points it’s because they seem to change from post to post depending on your stance of the day — making me wonder if even you’ve got them pinned down fully. percyfan’s already covered most of what I was going to reply to, but on the Quidditch and point system:
1. You’re going to have to define a game “that truly mattered”. Critics throw this bullshit term at anything under the sun, with the single common denominator being how unfair it makes the person or thing they’re bitching about seem for having alleged advantages that aren’t actually considered advantages by anyone else. The VAST majority of Harry’s Quidditch fame comes from his first three years at Hogwarts. Between the ages of 14 to 17, he plays and wins exactly two games for Gryffindor, both at the beginning of books five and six respectively, neither of which secure a guaranteed win of the yearly tournament, nor recognize him as the only or even main “star” of the games (this position generally belongs to Ron, Ginny, or both). He’s restricted from even playing the rest of the games in “Phoenix” and “Prince”, and of course isn’t even at school in the final year; if/when Gryffindor wins the Cup it’s without him. 14 to 17 are the earliest ages that most of your hopeful athletes would even consider beginning to take their sport seriously enough to sacrifice and place improvement and practice over fun and sheer love of the game when they play — which makes sense, because please, find me the coach or talent scout that’ll care more about the talent an applicant had as a preteen superstar than about the fact that he hasn’t played more than two full games since he was 14. Because that goes hand in hand with the decreased attention given to Quidditch that you yourself pointed out in later books, but how it fails to connect as a believable trade-off for you is beyond me. Yes, Quidditch mattered more to Harry, and by extension to the first three books when he had less to worry about, but is that your criteria of the games that truly matter? If so, I’m compelled to point out how few 11 – 13 year olds you’ll find willing to devote anywhere near the amount of commitment or sacrifice a high-schooler would to, well, anything, much less a game they aren’t playing either for sheer fun or because they’re just good at it. Harry put in a decent amount of work to supplement the talent for his age (he fucking took extra classes in “Azkaban” just to help his game), and even then he still lost, or couldn’t play, or won through plain luck more than he won through actual talent. But it wasn’t the level of discipline seen in high school jocks. The years when most athletes work for champion status are the years when Quidditch doesn’t matter as much to Harry – and he therefore DOESN’T get this champion status. If logic matters at all to your point, you can’t actually have it both ways.
2. Point system: you keep saying we’re missing your point here, but if you ask me, the problem seems to be that you assign an unjustified amount of weight and authority to Harry’s perception for a character you’re simultaneously dismissing as a douchebag. Where the fuck are we given the slightest idea that the point system collapses if one doesn’t know WHY a student earns or loses points? Whenever Harry picks up that kind of information it’s always through the rumor mill, it’s ALWAYS strictly gossip (which happens at every school in existence) and to our knowledge has little to no effect on the direct outcome of the competition. You know the one time it did? First book, when Dumbledore had to explain why Slytherin wouldn’t be winning the Cup despite having ended the year with the most points in their hourglass. Before this point, there’s no sign of anyone trying to get a record of who got which points and why — the system would be a lot fairer if this were checked for, but while various Gryffindors grumble a lot about Snape’s favoritism in “Stone”, not even McGonagall challenges Snape on his initial win or exactly what Slytherin gained all those points for. Indicating either that the reasons don’t matter, or that there’s no way for Snape or anyone to have skewed the results in a way that actually violates the rules or conditions of the contest. Still unfair, sure, because whatever the rules are they clearly allow for teacher bias, but not unusual for a recreational school merit system, especially one that has no direct influence over the students’ education. It ultimately just determines which House gets a trophy and a party in their honor at the end of the year. If Suzy First-Year’s the one who earns Gryffindor its winning points in her Charms class, we’re given no reason to believe it would matter less than Hermione’s earning points for her gajillion correct answers. It might matter less to *Harry* because he doesn’t know Suzy First-Year while Hermione’s his best friend. The books being in his POV might mean it would get more focus if it were Hermione instead of Suzy. Nowhere are we lead to assume the system would stop working entirely if it were Suzy and not Hermione, though. It’s fact that Gryffindor didn’t win the Cup in “Phoenix”; they had the least amount of points at the end of the year. No, Harry wasn’t at the party for the winning House, Sirius having just died and all, but we know there was a party, because when Harry comes across Luna he asks her why she wasn’t there. We’re not led to believe this party consisted of the collective student body staring at each other in silence, or that the Great Hall ceased to exist for the night since Harry wasn’t there.
There’s not much else to seriously address in your argument, since much of your gripes are with ideas that Rowling DIDN’T put into her books, but you would prefer she had, which to me is a laughable measure by which to criticize the actions of the book’s characters. I don’t even know how to approach your later stance on Draco: it’s not that he was a dick, it’s that the author set him up to be seen as a dick by Harry? Perhaps so, but I fail to see how that actually makes him less of a dick, or why a reader should see Harry as a bigger one for not wanting to befriend someone openly bigoted AND contemptuous of him from word one. How is he in the wrong there?
(It’s been addressed, but I’m always amazed when the “Draco clearly wanted to be friends, look how talkative he was to a kid dressed in the raggedly Muggle clothes Harry would’ve been dressed in that day” argument is made, especially by the same people who later claim to have issues with wizards who treat Muggles condescendingly. Um, really?) And on a comparative scale, I’m more amazed that the open contempt with which Draco treats his own friends and people he wants to befriend, doesn’t strike the same nerve that Harry’s occasional (and silent) contempt does. I strongly and completely disagree that watching Harry befriend someone who saw him as a lesser being due to his bigoted upbringing would have made for a more compelling story – it may just be a matter of opinion and taste, but it smacks of the same attitude seen from those who think Lily was wrong to write Snape off as a friend after he called her the wizarding equivalent of a racial slur, and perhaps that story might be interesting for the character doing the changing, but it always without fail comes at the detriment to the other character. You know, the one showing readers that if your friend is cool enough, it’s utterly okay to overlook his racist bullshit even when it’s directed your way! I’ll pass.
And yes, Harry is every bit the average schmuck with the same amount of decency and fallibility found in anyone. This is the whole reason I gave for posting here in the first place, by the way — it’s impossible not to notice how many of the posts on this thread are dripping with the exact same judgmental/dismissive/self-righteousness/hypocrisy/arrogant attitude they’re skewering Rowling’s characters and Rowling herself for. Or point it out. I’m a bit puzzled at the notion that Rowling somehow failed at her craft or unleashed a danger on the literary world by creating a character with flaws so ordinary and relatable I was literally seeing them exhibited on the screen by people criticizing those same flaws when I posted. And…what, your answer to this contradiction is “he’s no better than I am, but no one’s being asked to call me the Chosen One’? You realize this stance rests almost entirely on a specific reading and assumption that we MUST accept Dumbledore’s high (and repeatedly-shown-to-be-biased) opinion of Harry as fact, despite Dumbledore himself having been discredited rather thoroughly in “Deathly Hallows”? Half the series is dedicated to showing how dangerous or wrong it is to place more trust in reputation and hearsay over truth, because there’s always a giant-ass crack between the fallible person and the public legend of the person. It’s THE running theme of the series, from Lockhart right up to Dumbledore, I think it’s safe assuming the Chosen One moniker should be taken with more than a grain of salt. Yes, in Harry’s case the Chosen One legend meant an entire world of adults (Dumbledore included) felt okay dumping a war and a genocidal maniac almost exclusively on his non-special-and-unqualified shoulders for him to deal with, which is unfair and weird but there are worse lessons to teach kids than “if you’re saddled with an unfair job that people are depending on you to do, suck it up and deal”. And this is just one of a million different ways to interpret HP. The idea that a hero must be perfect or saintly beyond relatable flaws isn’t just crazy to me, but is also one I’ve yet to see supported without an argument along the lines of “well Rowling indicates HERE, and said on THIS day or in THAT interview of THAT magazine she meant Harry to be seen as a saint”. Which honestly? Just makes me wonder what train of logic allows for open interpretation and “Death of the Author” with authors one enjoys, while Rowling’s intentions and opinions are clung to more obsessively by her critics than by her fans.
It’s fascinating, but again, hardly evidence that Harry fails as a written character or even an influential one, in the sense that he encourages moral corruption.
Hey k, looks tell me one thing do you think of the Winchester brothers from Spn, or dexter as heroes?
Hello people, I am not a Harry potter fan . Series maybe, Harry nope. I am more of a Voldemort Bellatrix Malfoy person. So I’m gonna try and defend them . to C.U – Yeah we do. Voldy wanted immortality AND power and also wizards to triumph over muggles. As far as supporters are concerned ,he may have promised them good places in a govt run by them instead of one where the mudbloods share equal power? Maybe even immortality ?,Let’s face it we all want that. Most importantly their families well being if they supported him? What if the supporters saw eye to eye with Voldy’s claim of ridding them of mudblood scum, like Jews? And thus they follow him? Evil wizards are not scary just like your Terry Prachett baddies aren’t scary as they are both fiction. Your point being? To Harley- umm nah, doesn’t insult Voldy so okay I guess. And yeah, us slytherins ARE portrayed badly inspite of the fact we did produce people like Phineas Niggellus, Slughorn, and even that double-crosser Snape. In fact , when Harry spawn asked what if he is in my house, that idiot said Slytherin will have gained a great student, not the otherway round .Sonofabitch.
Now , K.
Lemme try to explain . Ohh, and percyfan, why didn’t u add voldy to that list of developed characters hmm? Crucio cruCIO. Voldemort despised humanity, and he wanted immortality for power. He didn’t want to be Tithonus. For power he needed to draw attention to himself and attract followers. And where the fuckinf fuck did you get the idea that he was scared of death? He wanted to be the master of death, Wormtail was scared of death, and his personification is perfect in that respect(another one you missed ,percyfan) Oh he knew of the Hallows , but didn’t believe fairy tales. His knowledge of magic always remained incomplete, just like yours. When he came to know of the deathsticks sure sot existence, he did every thing in his power to reach it. He had hidden that fact from most of his followers why do you think he did that? Heard of a half Jew adolf something ever? He was the heir of the Pureboods champion SALAZAR SLYTHERIN. He was charming enough to attract people and while at school showed what he was capable of(murdering his dad and grand parents maybe?) He was cold ,calculating and hell of a manipulator How do you think Hitler attracted followers BEFORE the phony elections ya idjit? His arrogance, inability to comprehend the strength of his opposition and the belief that no one could stop him brought his fall . Just like Hitler’s operation Barbossa was the ‘end of his beginning ‘ . Why would any one deatheater tell him that Malfoy had de-wanded Dumbly when NONE OF THEM saw that scene? And you are mad if tou think that Voldy sat down for a pantomime “Dumbles death” scene after scene like it had happened. His arrogance made him to underestimate a 16 yr old kid.
A certain powerful man who all but died 14 yrs ago, suddenly comes back to life in the middle of a graveyard in full glory , and the scariest of attires, claiming to have evaded death forever, would convince you that he is decrepit and that he was not as mighty as thought.? What would you do if Hitler is suddenly resurrected by ,say, an angel tomorrow? He had a maximum of 20-25 followers. Not an ARMY as many you happen to think. And why he had followers , see above.
On another note, cant help pointing out this one. His childhood was a lot like the one of our “hero”.
Maybe JKR has a brilliant grasp of psychology and she intentionally drew two characters , who turned out exactly opposite to each other in spite of very similar backgrounds? To make her readers understand every side of the
Look Gia and percyfan, I haven’t read all of your posts but clearly you do not get my points AT ALL.
1. Percyfan, are you saying that “Quidditch Through The Ages” is essential reading for all? Because frankly I do not wish to subject myself to J.K.Rowling’s indulgent crap ever again. And whether you like it or not, Harry Potter 1, a horribly flawed novel, remains in the Harry Potter canon. You cannot discredit whatever happens there and so I’m free to criticize any unrealistic event in that book.
Gia, I can list at least dozen of football academy in England, Spain, France etc that start training players for profession leagues at the age of 11. Considering J.K.Rowling’s background, she obviously took some ideas from football as a sport. You obviously do not know the intensity with which sports fans regard the game and how far one has to go if one wants to be even remotely good at a sport. But once again, what I have problem with isn’t the fact that Harry doesn’t take Quidditch seriously. But the fact that despite his lack of seriousness, he manages to excel right away in an environment where other kids have acquainted themselves with the sports years before him and have even tried to play it before. In real life, a kid at the age of 11 who has never heard of football would take months and a lot of obsessive training to look remotely OK at it.
By the time Harry stops caring for Quidditch because Voldermort etc, his status as a hero Seeker has already been established in the books. Why can’t you understand this simple point? J.K.Rowling can write another series about Quidditch, but it was obvious that her main intention in creating the sports was for Harry to have an environment in which he looks like hero, even though his succeed reeks of plot devices. Of course, when she started writing book 4 or 5, the same thing where the protagonist struggled for a little bit before emerging victorious would have gotten old. She’s not exactly stupid enough to not have changed it up.
2. Are you being deliberately obtuse? Obviously J.K.Rowling is not enough of a simpleton to not succeed in deceiving you. The whole point system renders any speculation impossible. It’s simple mathematics: if Gryffindor has A points at the start of the morning, then in class:
(A) Transfiguration: Suzy-first year earns 10 points, Tom-first year loses 5 points, Jake-first year earns 5 points, Annie-first year loses 10 points all because of a few flicks of the wands.
(B) Defenses Against Dark Art: Harry-fifth year earns 20 points, Hermione earns 10 points, some doofus like Neville loses 10 points maybe for doing something clumsy
(C) Divination: Mickey- 4th year loses 5 points, Annie loses 20 points, Kim earns 5 points
The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on.
Do you see? Just observing the way the points get won and then lost in one morning can make your head spin. Hogwarts has existed for thousands of years, of course its students would know not to assign dramatic reasons to the number of points.
Quit yapping about book 1. I know what happened. That was the only instance when they could tell what tipped the scale because everybody was in the same room and doing the same thing, which was listening to Dumbledore talk.
4. The matter is not with Harry Potter being an ordinary human being. The matter is that Harry Potter being an ordinary douchebag while getting sold as a hero. I literally have to reiterate my point every time I reply because you seemed to not have read it at all. Of course a lot of people can relate to him, but most of people, and I’m not exaggerating, are douchebags.
Do you know how often date rapes happen?
Do you know how often a child suffers from abuse from his/her parents?
Do you know how often a person cheats on his/her significant others?
Do you know how often a person in general commit a cowardly and petty act?
If you look at any person, I can guarantee you that that person has done something very regrettable in his/her life.
If you think that the average person is good, then I’ve got news for you. J.K.Rowling wanted to write an everyday Joe? Fine, but punish him harshly, put him through shit, give him unbearable amount of loneliness and maybe let him do his heroic act without anybody knowing it. Because that’s what life is. You won’t become a hero just by circumstances. I’m sick of this trope because it reinforces the idea that without an almost superhuman strength of character one can become an incredible human being. It’s not true. Just like in the case of J.K.Rowling, even though kids bought her books and somehow ate them up, she won’t ever be regarded as a great writer. Any strength that Harry possessed came from the fact that he had no other choice: either act like a hero and risk death or act like a coward and guarantee death.
I have pointed out plenty of instances before, percyfan. Do not force me to rewrite everything.
But he is a typical hero, don’t you see that percyfan? How many instances can you find in Western culture of story-telling where a nothing special guy stumbles into a bizarre circumstance and rises up to meet the hero-standard and saves the day? That’s why it’s particularly tiring to read about him.
5. Okay, it was my idea to put Draco as Harry’s friend. And the person who suggested this simply said that it would make the books more interesting and I agree. So let’s argue about whether it’ll make the books more interesting or not.
I agree that it’s not an unique idea, but hardly anything is in literature, everybody gets influenced by some other writers.
One of the main points that I put out here was that Draco was the only developed character in the Harry Potter verse whose thoughts didn’t revolve around Harry. Everybody was obsessed with either helping Harry or killing him. Which is highly unrealistic because human nature dictates a very high amount of narcissism, regardless of the circumstances. No one would ever think “fuck you Harry. I have my own business to take care of” except Draco, which would make it a very realistic portrait of a friendship.
Gia, please read again the part about “what could have happened” and “what happened”.
If you just read again the part in The Deathly Hallows where Dumbledore praised Harry to high heaven. And if you think that one book can discredit Dumbledore’s judgement. During his youth, his hubris and love for Grindelwald temporarily made him foolish. Yes, he did make an unforgivable mistake during this time, but since then, his mind had achieved a state of unheard of clarity. He himself dictated the events of the books. J.K.Rowling didn’t mean anything deeper when she had Dumbledore extolled Harry’s virtues. His intelligence was enough to guarantee that she expected what he said on this matter true.
6. He was hardly abused. Uhm. I beg to differ. Any psychologist would categorize the Dursley’s treatment of Harry as emotional abuse.
Here are the signs of emotional abuses, you can google it:
“Constant belittling, shaming, and humiliating a child.
Calling names and making negative comparisons to others.
Telling a child he or she is “no good,” “worthless,” “bad,” or “a mistake.”
Frequent yelling, threatening, or bullying.
Ignoring or rejecting a child as punishment, giving him or her the silent treatment.
Limited physical contact with the child—no hugs, kisses, or other signs of affection.
Exposing the child to violence or the abuse of others, whether it be the abuse of a parent, a sibling, or even a pet.”
Any question? Or do I have laboriously start quoting passages in which the Dursleys do these things to Harry?
Once again, I said clearly that I did not expect everyone who had suffered from abuse to have mental illnesses. But to give Harry Potter struggle with one would have been very realistic and encouraging to people out there who do too. And if you think that having mental illnesses after having been abused for years indicates a lack of strength or that thinking that person who has been abused for years might have mental illnesses is insulting, then you need to check yourself. Google up ableism.
7. I wish. If I could see Harry Potter as an intentional antihero I’d have burst a gland in rage. If an antihero escaped all those ordeals and got regarded as a hero in a kid’s book, then I must say with even more certainty that Harry Potter is the Antichrist.
Read the report cards again. Even though they both passed the same numbers of subjects, if you compared the scores themselves, you would see that Harry got most of his higher than Ron’s. Say in a class where the passing mark is 5. And you passed 10/12 subjects with the scores of 6 and your friend passed the same numbers of subjects with the scores of 8. Would you say that you and your friend was equals academically? Don’t be absurd.
Right, point out ONE thing Ron was better than Harry, while Harry trumps Ron in everything else. How many times do I have to reiterate this? J.K.Rowling is not stupid enough to not be blatant in her attempts to turn Harry into a banal hero on the shoulders and at the expense of his friends. She would always make one concession now and then. But make no mistake, she didn’t do so in order to create an universe that would reflect the reality but rather mask her clumsy intentions to write a few feel-good books that ended up having harmful effects.
8. Let’s drop this, because I have no energy to explain again about the point system, Quidditch flaws, and many other plot holes that I’d have to find those forsaken books for proofs.
9. Right.
Listen, what do you think that the centaurs did to Umbridge which traumatized her so much? Did you read the part where Ron made the hoof noises that jolted her up and sent her into panics? Do you think that in that circumstance, Umbridge would’ve tried to resist the centaurs or submit to them in order to mitigate the physical harms? A lot of victims of rapes don’t receive bruises or marks because they submit right away so they have to get rape kits to collect evidences of the crimes.
You’re crazy if you think that J.K.Rowling, so well-versed in the folklores, would turn away form the tradition for no purpose. Rape exists in subtext. But it still exists. And Hermione left Umbridge in the woods despite having read a lot about magical creatures and knowing that centaurs would commit rape in this case. She even laughed at Umbridge afterwards. She was obviously not contrite and condoning rape and violence in the case where someone inconveniences her.
And Umbridge suffered from trauma. I don’t know what you’re think. Do you think that a mentally ill person would go around screaming or something? Loads of people with depression/bipolar disorder/PTSD/etc go on with their days without anyone detecting anything wrong.
Now, you would agree with me that in real life if a girl permanently disfigured another one because she got betrayed, she would have to face criminal charge, wouldn’t you? The whole thing just stinks of hypocrisy. If a bookworm commits a crime, he/she’s a criminal. Point blank. What she did to that girl was unforgivable and just horrific.
whodoesntcare, I don’t know which book you read but it was canonically acknowledged that Voldermort lived his life that way because of his fear of death. Didn’t Dumbledore rattle on about how if Voldermort could love he would realize that death was just another journey. la la.
I don’t care about the similarity between Voldermort and Hitler tbh. In the context of Harry Potter, he failed to hold up as a villain. He was too stupid. J.K.Rowling tried to nail it into our heads that he was a genius wizard but all his acts betrayed an astounding level of stupidity. He set out for the Hocrux even in Hogwarts, yet did not somehow learned of the Hallows, which Dumbledore managed to. I don’t believe that anyone as obsessed or intelligence as he was would’ve not run into books and evidences of the Hallows’ existences.
And the thing with Hitler was that he gave his follower no reprise from the madness. If he had disappeared for 14 years, most of them would’ve double-checked and said “Wait a min, this is just wrong!”. But Voldermort just returned as a decrepit thing and everyone of his followers went back to their fanaticism? They had more than enough time to reassess the situation and see that Voldy was not an appropriate leader for their cause, given his tyranny and unstable mental health. The whole thing got constructed like a falling house of a plot.
K, you are simply an idiot. Dumbly wont twist the facts even a little bit to prepare his weapon to fight their common enemy RIGHT? . He was scared, so took steps never before tried to avoid death which made him more vulnerable and terrifying at the same time he wasn’t hiding in the attic to defy death. . While throwing your “I IS INTELLECTUALZ, DON’T READ MASS POPULARIZED AND COMMERCIALIZED LITRATURE, AND WONT READ OPINIONS OTHER THAN MINE LALALA ” tantrum, you failed to realize that the Hitler similarity is not an opinion, but a FACT. Rowling picked the most bloodcurdling real life personae and made her villain eerily similar to him, which works because of the reasons I said, and you didn’t bother to read. Oh and you are still missing his biggest character trait, ARROGANCE , like, idk, HITLER.
Ohh ad Gia and Percyfan, this is what you get for supporting Harry from stopping the darklord from killing these mud monkeys. His/her addimitance to the fact that he didn’t read your arguments and the FACT that didn’t read mine either, convinces me that he/she didn’t read 2000 pages of harry potter either. Frankly this board is not worth my time anymore. And K, you didn’t answer my question about the Wnchesters.
I whole heartedly support whodoesntcare . Probably I am wasting my time here but I’ll go on hoping 1 thing- someday someone with brains will stumble upon this and realize who makes sense, and Gia, thumbs up to you.
1. Told you, drop this one already. B/c you wont realize that every fairy tale , Aeshops fables, and most of \what passes as literature has flaws. If you don’t understand why the first novel of an author is allowed to have flaws, you understand nothing at all. Criticize all you want, it wont change the fact that it was the 1st novel, a fairy tale retold, a lot changed in the following ones.
2. Quidditch is a little similar ,but a lot different from Football. Seeker has EXACTLY 1 job, catching the snitch, he does not need team collaboration for winning ,yes , but all the seeker need is good reflexes, speed and swiftness, all of which Harry had from dodging Dudly for 10 years..(training enough eh?)
3. Now I get it. You are whining because is was said in the books Harry and co made Gryffindor victorious, and you think no one can say that for sure. Hmm .Exactly. everyone matters but consider this- 1st book you say you know what happened, 2nd book Harry –Ron secured 200 points near the very end for special services, 3rd yr, quidditch victory secured 1st pos for gryffindor after that, house cup lost importance because of more pressing matters. Thus, in conclusion, we can say surely that Harry was important in winning the house cup
4. Ok ,now every one who relates to Harry are dochebags. Brilliant. You wanna know stuff Harry did that he regretted? Causing Sirius’s death, Sectumsempra-ing Draco , he also blames himself for Cedric’s death . Nobody in the Wizarding world knew for certain what exactly Harry did before his final duel in book 7. All stories about him were rumours, besides Hermy and Ron,only the readers saw Harry at his full glory. The so called “abusive “ family, Killing off every parent figue,near death experience every year, finally life of a fugitive isn’t enough shit for you? Harry had the freedom to choose free will, or step up to his fate, his destiny. He could have easily said f you, and transfer to China or Australlia, he didn’t you know why? B/c it is“the
difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the
arena with your head held high. Some people, perhaps, would say that there was little to choose
between the two ways, but Dumbledore
knew — and so do I, thought Harry, with a rush of fierce
pride, and so did my parents — that there was all the difference in the world.” The inability to understand this stanza equals inability o understand entire EFFING HARRY POTTER SERIES. So what is he to you? Typical hero or everyday douche bag? I’m confused apparently so are you.
5. Great. I see you fail to say anything about all the characters who gave a damn about harry. Probably you didn’t even read that part.
6. YAAAAY back to our favorite topic. Yes yes and yes these categorizes as abuse in the modern west, but definitely not where I live, or even in West before a mere 15-20 years ago. These are very basic grade A offences. You do maintain Harry is a jerk right? Then how are these for Abuse issues? Extreme curiosity,poking nose every where as Dursleys never allowed his questions, anger issues ,insensitivity (ask Cho, hermione and Ron)scare for physical relations as he never had hugs and kisses from his family, awkward around girls, hatred for authority figures ,The first book features Harry at his new “school,” becoming obsessed with a mirror, where he spends endless days imagining his perfect parents. Dumbledore, the paragon of surrogate love, warns Harry that the mirror has driven people insane, because spending all your time in fantasy causes you to become unmoored to the real world., No friends outsde of his house/year/similar status(Luna), full trust in anyone who shows love like Quirell, fake mmody landing him in trouble too often, breaking rules as the dursrleys repressed him so much, Sirius’s death from his martyr complex,and an urge to prove his worth as the Durseleys constantly belittled him? Want more? And abuse doesn’t work the way you think it does. Here’s a chart for you ;1-4 no understanding of the abuse 5-6 awe ,anger and desperation, 7-8 belief that someday ,somewhere a fairytale ending waits for him,9-12 realization that’s not happening. While the teenage years mainly seals the character of a person. Match this to Harry.
7. your wish. The report cards records grades,not marks noway to say who got more .Dumbo. Things Ron are better than harry @ He is a better friend, didn’t leave Harry’s side in 1st and 2nd books when others doubted him ,while the two times ron had disagreement with Harry, Harry sulked and acted like a baby instead of trying to understand his side.@ 12 year old ron faced his greatest fear spiders so as to accompany Harry. It was basically death for him. Harry showed this kinda courage only when he was 17 ,walking into the arms of invading death. other times he jumped into stuff without knowing what was in store.@ He didn’t give up easily in spite of not being an instant success like Harry, he trained and trained till he became a quidditch star @ he usually tried to logically and coolly calm Harry down when he was Throwing temper tantrums@ he had superior knowledge of the wizarding world. I’ll add more if I can think of those
8. 8.Yea lets. As whatever you’ll write, it will immediately challenged, and then you don’t read others opinions.
9. I can hardly believe I am having to do this I viewed Prof. Umbridge as being a very clean, well educated, nicely dressed and groomed person, an “indoor” person. The centaurs represented outdoor people, who gather their own food and firewood, go hunting, and live in the woods. I never thought Umbridge was raped. I thought she might have been “roughed up” a bit, treated crudely, temporarily enslaved. . To find rape in a children’s book is not just ridiculous but sad that you had to sink that low. its not something to be thrown around lightly. I have several Pagan/Wiccan friends I had read this post and they all agreed with the comments that the professor was scared $hitle$$ but raped? no, it’s a kids book and movie….. they also agreed that you are very unhappy lady/lad. they may have ran her through the forest and left her there to get the crap scared out of her. I suspect that all that happened to her was to be dragged through the forest, and held prisoner by creatures that she considered quite inferior to her. That that was more than sufficient to traumatize her.The centaurs in the Harry Potter universe are portrayed as “noble savages,” i.e. naturally intelligent and sensitive beings who, in many respects, are “more civilized” than humans are So, I really can’t buy for a moment that the centaurs would have raped Umbridge, or that Rowling would have suggested such. They may not even have run her through the forest to scare her; they may have just brought her to their lair, tied her up, and left her there facing the wall, deaf to her demands of “Release me at once, you savages!”As far as the centaurs in Harry Potter go, I do recall that they were even more resentful of humans in a variety of ways as time went on, which is why Firenze ended up becoming a kind of outcast among them, because he was too interested in having peaceful relations with them. (Which sort of reminds me of how some apologists and “assimilationists” in certain political and social movements get treated…) I think they were to be feared, as a result, and one was to be cautious with them, but I don’t recall that there was talk of them being more inclined to violence in their dealings with humans. I may be wrong on that, however; I’m sure they’d not hesitate to lay the smack-down on someone who actually needed it/deserved it, or was actively seeking it, and even though Umbridge sort of falls into that category, at the same time I can’t see them raping herThey considered themselves to be more civil than humans and were quite refined. The only brutish thing you could percieve would be the fact that they lived in the wilderness but then that’s not “brutish”, that’s another way of living. I think that Potterverse centaurs felt nothing close to sexual attraction to humans (think of Parvati and Lavender trying unsucessfully to seduce Firenze). Potterverse centaurs were wise beings who spent long hours analizing the stars and had great knowledge of astopnomy and astrologyI don’t think that Hermione or Harry would mock a rape victim no matter how bad she was, and I don’t think Rowling would write that. Because that wouldn’t make sense with the whole point of the series. And you do know that horse penis is to huge for a human vagina right? So even if she did submit, she would be bruised pretty badly. And you say “And Umbridge suffered from trauma. I don’t know what you’re think. Do you think that a mentally ill person would go around screaming or something? Loads of people with depression/bipolar disorder/PTSD/etc go on with their days without anyone detecting anything wrong.” So why cant this be the same in case of your ABUSED Harry Theory? What convinced you she suffered trauma?
10. Just like you wont accept the 1st book is allowed to have flaws, I wont accept hermy did anything wrong by punishing a person who sold them out and severely hampered their preparations to fight the main villain.
Guys, please. Don’t feed the trolls.
And Harry fans? Please stop taking this so seriously. You ask us if we understand that Harry Potter is only a book. Yes, it is. Yes, we take dissing it pretty seriously. That’s the entire point of this thread. Do we take it *too* seriously sometimes? Yes. By all means, yes.
But the same applies to you.
This is a book, for crying out loud. We aren’t trying to attack you personally. Nobody is trying to stop you from reading it or enjoying it. By all means, if you find something you like, run with it. But don’t expect everyone to share your opinion. Understand, please, that everyone on this board already has their own opinion and whether or not anyone’s arguments make sense they are unlikely to change it. So what good does it do you to jump in and start an argument.
And before you ask, yes, I apply the same philosophy to Harry Potter haters who troll on fan boards.
Anne, i agree with you. I personally do not come here to change , say ,yours,K’s , Harley’s or anyone’s opinions. I come here cuz i like to debate. This is one of the only discussion site thats almost regularly updated. So ,is that same as trolling? Why cant we all act like adults and have an informed,mature debate?
I’m glad to hear it. But I’m afraid (in my opinion!) it isn’t really “an informed,mature debate” when the participants call each other “Dumbo” and scream back and forth in all caps. I consider that trolling, though I’m sure others have different names for it.
And please understand that I am not talking specifically to you. There have been quite a few… members of the opposite opinion visiting here over the years, and some of them were/are very obvious trolls (Hannah from ’08 comes to mind).
hmm. true, i myself am not very proud of certain times i’ve …….. well, lost temper , I am sorry for those, and will try to refrain from that kind of an attitude. It should stick to both side though. Right?
agreed. 🙂
Thanks!
percyfan, I must I admit that I haven’t read your argument. Nor will I ever. A few sentences in that I’ve realized that you have continued to fail to grasp my points and make very poor attempts to defend yours. But you have resilient, I’ll give you that.
On a second thought, I will contest you on the second to last point because it enrages me. Umbridge was raped, pure and simple. The content exists on a subtextual level but nonetheless EXISTS. I know that it’s a children’s book, but that explains precisely why J.K.Rowling only implied it. She, as a fantasy writer, knows Greek myths inside out. Anybody would understand that, by including centaurs in such a story, rape would be implied. If she didn’t mean for rape to occur, she should’ve stated so explicitly. Otherwise, she’s failed as a writer. Greek mythology is a part of a fantasy writer’s vocabulary. When you watch a gangster film and hear someone says “I will take care of him” you know instantly that by “take care” that person means “kill”. Not knowing that wouldn’t magically change the character’s intent. He/she wouldn’t go from wanting to kill a person to wanting to draw them a bath because of your ignorance, I assure you. Likewise, the fact that you had no prior knowledge of this part of Greek mythology and therefore misinterpreted J.K.Rowling’s intent does not do away with the story-line. Umbridge did get raped. And anyone with any knowledge about trauma would tell you that her reactions to Ron’s hoof noises in the hospital confirms this theory. As if it wasn’t obvious enough.
Enough. I can safely say that this is so far one of the few debates I have not enjoyed at all.
Harry Potter books are not by any standard fine literature. But their fans sure are some of the most militant people around. Ciao.