Oh, and also

[farla]

The book sucked.

I mean, at various points I kept stopping and thinking I'd made a mistake and fallen for one of those fanfics, because the stuff was like someone slavishly copying existing books mixed with fanon speculation, but it matched the lines I found mentioned from the original leak and was written in longwinded style and matched the reviews based on the original leak.

And I should point out that I speed read the book with my brain on complete hold, not thinking about anything. To put this in perspective, I picked up book three, ran into Remus Lupin, thought "lupin, lupus, remus founder of rome yeah I bet that's one of her fitting important names" and then did not figure out he was a werewolf until the announcement by dint of not processing anything in the book or making any effort to figure it out. (Even more precisely, it wasn't even "figure out" since I hadn't paid enough attention to think of it as a mystery) My hate for Harry Potter and the unending bad writing appears only when anyone tries to actually discuss it as being legitimate, at which point I will pull up the text from where it is buried in my brain and rage about how Fred and George's behavior is sociopathic, Slytherin are coded evil and she went halfway back on it when people bitched, the romance was thrown together to get back at her fans, Harry Potter's behavior in the fifth book is not "a great portrayal of typical teenager" and dismissing teenagers complaining about it as such is the height of insanity, there's no way wizards can be living embedded in muggle society with regular muggleborn wizards added yet remain unaware of everything, she's obviously making up half of this as she goes along, she treats magic like it's been around for five minutes and everyone else is incapable of seeing out of the glass box (because a bunch of DUMBASS SCHOOL KIDS are the only ones who ever thought that magic super luck might be useful before a battle). But only when it's brought up. I read at breakneck pace and process nothing and usually end with kind of an "eh".

So you can imagine just how absurd things have to be for me to notice them.

(Those of you who like the books may take this as a ringing endorsement. But understand I think you are insane and/or evil.)

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Yay! Insanely evil...
The books are a bit inconsistent with everything and they are a bit childish for the most part, but you have to admit the words do rather flow well...

And about the Slytherin part, at least she's not doing the same thing as Tolkein with orks that were born evil...

[farla.livejournal.com]

Except she totally is, but without admitting it.

"Oh, all Slytherin aren't evil, that'd be dumb. Uh... here are like two kids who are just kind of there, not actively evil every moment we see them. And a third who's evil but kind of regretting it because it blew up in their face, which totally counts. OMG, I am a balanced writer!!!... Okay, back to the Gryffindors and the unending awesome that is their bravery/nobility/existence."

[(Anonymous)]

It goes a bit deeper than that. Harry was almost a Slytherin, but decided he didn't want to be one like Voldemort. Then there's something going on with Snape who Dumbledore trusts(trusted). And also that Dumbledore incident itself which cannot be elaborated upon for fear of the fans who will kill because of spoilers etc.
The book is meant to be a moral story, the good are good or used to be bad and turned good and the villains were just regular people and made bad choices. That's all the book is really, "you have talent, you have a choice, you're all the same, what will you do now?" The small Ronald Dahl things she adds in the background are probably influenced by all the books she read in her childhood, and maybe even by fairy tales too. One of her favorite books involved cousins marrying each other and two separate sides of a family representing good and evil, so she might not have any second thoughts about all those sorts of things.

[farla.livejournal.com]

The book is meant to be a moral story, the good are good or used to be bad and turned good and the villains were just regular people and made bad choices.

Except that being in Slytherin makes you as innately evil. So eleven year old kids are evil for being sorted there.

It's about as much a champion of decisions over birth as Naruto, really. Harry is descended from Godric Gryffindor and defaultly good pretty much from birth. Meanwhile the descendent's of Slytherin are inbred freaks who produce the psychotic Voldemort. And while Voldemort's taint is in the artifacts of the other two houses, pure perfect Gryffindor remains untouched. Slytherin are not only evil, they're constantly being described as ugly and stupid. Snape, the sort-of not evil Slytherin, gets the ringing complement from Dumbledore about being sorted too early - ie, he wasn't really a Slytherin. That's like saying "oh, that black guy seems sort of clever, he must be part white" or something, it's just driving home the original point as being so irrefutable that there can't even be a handful of exceptions, there must be some mitigating factor. Harry using "crucio", you know, the spell used to torture people into insanity, as a casual battle spell? A-okay, because he's a Gryffindor, using it against a Slytherin. Slytherins doing anything? Evil.

Everyone has their predetermined role. Where you're sorted into, or who your ancestors are, completely determine who you are and what side you're on.

[(Anonymous)]

I do agree that she does make everyone in Slytherin evil and everyone in Gryffindor good by default, but these students chose those houses. Harry went to Gryffindor because he wanted to be in Gryffindor, which is most likely the case for all the other students too.

The reason why ancestors and family have to do with sorting is because of parents and genes. Slytherins look odd because most of them are pureblooded, they have family that has married into itself for hundreds of generations which causes certain recessive genes to affect them more than others this also can potentially alter how they think as well as what they believe. Parents also have influence over children, Death Eaters who were in Slytherin before have children who aim to be Death Eaters who are in Slytherin themselves. Slytherin isn't exactly a house where everyone who is sorted into it is evil, but a house for which everyone who wants to be in it is evil, it's a choice like deciding who your friends are, or an alligance in a way.

And Dumbledore is just prideful, he's not exactly a good person himself and he wanted to say something to shock Snape. The quote also seems to be more of a way of saying that people change and can redeem themselves, Snape wanted to be a Death Eater before, but after he found what that entails he changed his mind. The same happens with Draco, and Dumbledore also.

[farla.livejournal.com]

Except that contradicts what you said about "you have talent, you have a choice, you're all the same, what will you do now?"

You don't have a choice if your life is completely determined by who your parents are, or being an eleven year old kid wanting to go to a house just knowing it's where Mom and Dad want you to be, which in turn was determined by their parents, and so on. That's pretty much the definition of predestined. Rowling has all this stuff about how bloodlines don't matter, except that Harry's a descendant of Gryffindor and Voldemort's a descendant of Slytherin and oh, by the way, Gryffindors are awesome and Slytherins are fucked up creeps who murder people they love. Blood runs pretty damn thick, I'd say. Seriously, this is Naruto all over. "I will fight destiny and not give up, because bloodlines and how you're born don't matter, and even when I'm getting beaten down, I'll get up and prove I can win all on my own. And I can do this because I got an all-powerful demon sealed in me at birth."

Malfoy goes into Slytherin because he knows his parents want him to. That's it. It's repeatedly shown that this is true for many wizarding children. Meanwhile, the only thing Harry knows about it is that Hagrid (falsely!) said every dark wizard was a Slytherin, so he doesn't want to be there. Great example of "choice" there.

Slytherins look odd because most of them are pureblooded, they have family that has married into itself for hundreds of generations which causes certain recessive genes to affect them more than others this also can potentially alter how they think as well as what they believe.

That would be an okay idea, but unfortunately, directly contradicted by canon. Rowling was too busy making comments about how some Slytherin looked like he had troll blood in him or some random girl had an ugly face. Addi tonally, given how few true pure bloods there are, that plenty of those few end up in other houses (both James and Sirius, remember, are pureblood), and that many known Slytherin aren't pureblood, this doesn't fly. Additionally, purebloods are perfectly sane and attractive if they're good or Rowling finds a way to phrase it insultingly - James and Sirius, again, or Narcissa, who gets a description that says she'd be attractive if she didn't have such a nasty expression. Plenty of the ugly ones aren't purebloods, plenty of the purebloods aren't ugly. The only thing that determines attractiveness is what house you're in.

More, even if this was true and somehow there's an "evil" gene that came out from the inbreeding, that proves my point that it's all predetermined! I mean, what the hell are you arguing here? That they're genetically predestined to be evil because it's in their GENETIC CODE? How the hell does that help? What choice do they make? They're born evil! How is that different from orcs, aside from being about fifty times worse?

Slytherin isn't exactly a house where everyone who is sorted into it is evil, but a house for which everyone who wants to be in it is evil, it's a choice like deciding who your friends are, or an alligance in a way.

Oh, sorry. It's not a house for monsters, it's a house where people who want to be monsters go. Because there's a huge difference there.

See, this is why I hate talking about Harry Potter. The readers will have some dumbass justification that's not what she wrote by any stretch of imagination, but they'll desperately argue it is, and qualify it and qualify it to try to make it fit into canon somehow because the alternative is she fucked up and wrote a crappy story.

The house is evil. Everyone in it is evil except for two or three who are acting self-serving in a way that happens to put them on the good guy team, and this is just because it is. The shades of grey, they are blinding.

[(Anonymous)]

Having a family with generations of Slytherins doesn't guarantee that someone will be in that house, it makes the chances of being in the house much greater, but not something that will happen no matter what. (I think I left the last bit out when I was writing my last comment, sorry.) Trolls are supposed to be ugly and violent by nature, so that would be the reason he was in Slytherin, though if you notice Hagrid is half giant and giants are also usually violent and he was in Gryffindor, JKR just made a half troll go to Slytherin most likely because they smell bad etc. and that would cause a few problems with Hagrid if he were half troll. So there's a bit of a choice there that doesn't have to do with blood completely.

Yes, some purebloods do look good, just like some kings and queens from centuries ago weren't all necessarily prone to birth defects all the time. Sirius is in Gryffindor, but his brother was in Slytherin and they look alike, Narcissa and Bellatrix are both cousins of Sirius and they both look good too. They are more closely related than some of the other purebloods and they have some common traits. JKR has Narcissa have a nasty look and Bellatrix looking haughty because Narcissa pure bloods are better than everyone else, and the place she was in at the time most likely had hundreds of nonpurebloods around and Bellatrix was in Azkaban for a few years so it's not a surprise if she looks odd after that experience(as even Sirius didn't look too good after Azkaban). And look at Wormtail he was in Gryffindor and he betrayed all his friends and he's not at all brave. It's because he chose his house to be with a group of popular kids just like Snape chose Slytherin because he planned to be a Death Eater.
And genes make it more likely that belief in certain things passes on. There was a study once that showed certain people were more likely to believe in God than others because of their genes, this happens in real life, so why shouldn't it happen in a book? And there is still a choice as to whether or not someone wants to believe in something, it's just less or more likely that they will believe it depending on certain genes they have or don't have, it isn't necessarily certain that "A" will happen if you have the "A" gene, it just becomes more likely.
There's a huge difference in being forced into a category and choosing to be in a category. Wormtail was in Gryffindor and he never had any of the traits of a Gryffindor suggesting that he went there by choice.
And JKR did write a story with a clear good and evil divider because she wrote a children's story. She wasn't writing something that could be taken apart piece by piece because she was thinking about what to feed her family the next day when the whole story was developing. The bad characters look ugly because it's a book for children and that's something children identify with evil.

[farla.livejournal.com]

GAH. If she is making the half-troll go to Slytherin because half-troll is something negative, then no, there is no choice and it all revolves around blood. BECAUSE GOING TO SLYTHERIN BECAUSE YOU ARE HALF TROLL IS ABOUT EXACTLY MY GODDAMN POINT. Trolls are supposed to be ugly and violent by nature, so that would be the reason he was in Slytherin THAT MEANS IT'S PREDETERMINED BY BLOOD AND NOT HIS CHOICE. HOW IS THIS SO COMPLEX?

If you're defending her writing Slytherin as ugly because they're all inbred, then the fact that plenty of the ugly people are not pureblood, and plenty of the pureblood are not ugly DISPROVES IT. End. I do not give a damn about WHY so-and-so looks haughty because it is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT as well as FUCKING OBVIOUS IN THE BOOK, seriously why do you think I want you to explain?

If you're defending her making the entire house evil because they made a choice, then the fact that their choice amounts to doing what Mommy wants means they did not, actually, CHOOSE JACK SHIT. If you then start saying it's because they're inbred, you are DISPROVING YOUR OWN DAMN POINT AND SHOULD SHUT UP.

As to the whole "it's a kids' book"

1) NO FUCKING DUH. I BELIEVE MY ARGUMENT ABOUT IT SUCKING AS ACTUAL LITERATURE MAY RELATE TO THIS.

2) Hey kids, anybody who looks ugly, especially fat people, are evil! Also, it's GREAT to judge people by their bloodline. Yeah, that is an awesome message that should totally be in a kids' book. I don't imagine why anyone would complain about incredibly fucked up morals in a kids' book. I mean, we're totally capable of making our own decisions, it's not like we're, y'know, kids or something.

3) Aw she was rushed on the first book. Because it's not like the Slytherin=evil bit got steadily more pronounced in later books, except how it totally did and all Slytherin were Death Eater sympathizers except for the ones that were actual death eaters.

[(Anonymous)]

He's half troll, Hagrid is half giant. My point in bringing that up is that they are similar and one went in either house, so blood doesn't completely determine it, but it plays a role.

Mommy happens to play a big role in everything in a child's life, even if there is no mother in their life. Your whole life starts with parents giving you lessons. If one person has a mother that is racist and the other has a mother that is a humanist then a child is going to make all their decisions based on their mother's actions, whether they decide to rebel or follow in their mother's footsteps is the choice that is made. The same goes with any adult role models in a child's life, which is usually the parents.

Children are prone to make judgments on looks, it's a fact. Adults do the same, stereotypes happen. Fat people aren't ugly and I never said that so don't assume. Although it's not a good morale in a story to use physical ugliness it arises in several stories, which doesn't make JKR's story any worse or any better than classic fairytales and folklore. It's mainly there to scare people into doing good things.

The whole point of the book is not to judge people on their bloodline, if you didn't notice that then you shouldn't be arguing about the book. Voldemort is the equivalent of Hitler and he ends up dieing in the end.

Slytherin does equal evil, because that's the choice that was made when they went into that house.

And please don't swear, it clutters your writing and is completely pointless.

[farla.livejournal.com]

Actually, she makes it very clear that fat people are ugly, which is why I said it. Or did you miss Dudley, Crabbe and Goyle, and how all the Slytherin girls have fat pug faces?

It's mainly there to scare people into doing good things.
What?

No, but seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you? Do you even listen to what you're saying or are you just spewing mindless crap?


The whole point of the book is not to judge people on their bloodline, if you didn't notice that then you shouldn't be arguing about the book. Voldemort is the equivalent of Hitler and he ends up dieing in the end.
Voldemort is the FUCKING DESCENDANT OF SLYTHERIN.

Descendant of Gryffindor = pure perfect selfless Jesus savior. Descendant of Slytherin = evil sociopathic mass murderer.

If you make the one meaningful decision in your life at age eleven, based on Mom saying one house is cooler than the other, then it's not a fucking choice. If you're born good or evil because of who your ancestor was hundreds of years ago, it's not a choice. If you're saying that choices are made based on life experiences and genetics - CONGRATULATIONS, THAT'S NOT CHOICE. THAT'S NOT EQUALITY. THAT COMPLETELY CONTRADICTS EVERYTHING YOU STARTED OFF SAYING. THAT'S FUCKING PREDESTINATION.

For the love of god, SHUT UP.

[an-angels-grace.livejournal.com]

'Harry is descended from Godric Gryffindor '

One thing... Harry _isn't_ descended from Gryffindor. JK has said it multiple times, and actually he's probably closer related to Slytherin then anything else.

Sorry, random note ><;; Please dont shoot me?

[farla.livejournal.com]

I don't even follow fandom, but people who read the interviews really need to learn the difference between "Um, yeah, his grandparents died ordinary deaths..." and "No, he's not descended from Gryffindor." Seriously, I don't even care about these things and I can follow along fine.

James Potter is a pureblood whose family line lived in Godric's Hollow. It was subtle like a big stick to the face.

[(Anonymous)]

Voldemort is probably related to Gryffindor too then, he and Harry are actually related by the Peverells(I'm 99% sure that's spelled wrong) and the youngest Peverell was the one who lived in Godric's Hallow and the middle one was an ancestor of Voldemort.

MA: That sort of shuts down Heir of Gryffindor [theories], as well.

JKR: [Pause.] Yeah. Well - yeah.

That sort of disproves it, but JKR has been known to change her plans after interviews. If he were related to Gryffindor then it probably would have been in the book somewhere anyway like the way Voldemort is related to Slytherin is part of the plot.

[farla.livejournal.com]

...seriously? Damn, I want to be a major author and lead gullible readers around by the nose now.

The interviewer asks if Harry's grandparents were murdered because he's the heir of Gryffindor. JRK immediately explains clearly that his grandparents died natural wizarding deaths. The interviewer then says that this shuts down the theories, and JRK gives a stammered, vague agreement where it sounds like she was about to clarify, but decided not to.

Subtle.

[actonthat.livejournal.com]

Not going to lie, I thought I was the only one who thought Harry Potter was cliche, horribly written, and generally shallow.

As such, you win at life.

[farla.livejournal.com]

Oh, it's a bit more common than you'd think. It's just most Harry Potter haters talk about it less than Rowling's legions of mindslaves. But not as common as it should be. But you might be amused by a set of reviews I've been reading. A livejournal denizen reviewed Half-Blood Prince (http://mike-smith.livejournal.com/tag/halfbloodprince), Prisoner of Azkaban, and Sorcerer's Stone (http://mike-smith.livejournal.com/tag/sorcerer%27s+stone), in that order, and is just beginning Deathly Hallows. (http://mike-smith.livejournal.com/tag/prisonerofazkaban)

You probably already figured this out, but...

[ember-reignited.livejournal.com]

I like the books.

Yeah, they're way over-hyped and about a million miles away from the "BEST THING EVAR!!!" that so many people seem to think they are, but I still enjoy them.

Re: You probably already figured this out, but...

[farla.livejournal.com]

(You are insane and also evil.)

I don't actually mind the books, so much as the insistence they're more than simply readable. They're a perfectly good light read that doesn't hold up well when you start thinking about the morality of locking a kid in a cabinet for weeks without food or water, and how he survives only because the cabinet was magic, which they didn't know, and came out traumatized to the point of being catatonic, which was okay because it meant Slytherin was at a disadvantage at Quiddich. Um, yay.

The books tend to gloss over this stuff, which is okay as a revenge fantasy sort of thing, but not if you stop assuming Harry and friends are automatically right by default, let alone if you think it's supposed to be written completely straight.

Re: You probably already figured this out, but...

[ember-reignited.livejournal.com]

Bzuh? I don't remember that part at all. But then, there's a lot from those books that I don't remember, as... they're pretty forgettable, frankly. Plus most of them I haven't read more than once. And since, after PoA, that once was when they first came out, which means I was relatively young for most of them, I wasn't exactly evaluating them very thoroughly.

I'm fairly sure that I've matured as a reader since HBP, so I may have an entirely different impression after DH.

Re: You probably already figured this out, but...

[farla.livejournal.com]

^^ One of the (many) problems with the books is Rowling likes to have cutesy Roald Dahl levels of abuse, which tend to get side mentions rather than happen on camera - Ron idly comments his brothers gave him an acid lollypop that ate through his mouth when he was a kid, or that when he was five they tried to make him swear an unbreakable vow. A Slytherin is shoved into the cabinet by Fred and George and locked there. Later it's mentioned he was considered missing, then still later that he finally escaped after several weeks but was badly confused by what happened and had to stay in the hospital wing. The events are all off camera, separated by a lot of pages, and rarely have the dots connected between them, as well as finishing up with a "Well, he's alive and mostly okay now" ending and being treated as no big deal in the narration.

Now, if we're in happy no consequence schoolkid revenge fantasy world, this is fine. But the moment you move beyond that, it gets creepy.

[wintersheir]

But understand I think you are insane and/or evil.

Darn tootin'. ^_^ I just finished the book so I'm going to need a while before I can think critically about it. There were a few parts that gave me brain itch that I recall, but I'll have to do a second reading to realize what they were, probably.

[farla.livejournal.com]

I was planning on relying on the Pottermageddon to distill out everything important so I wouldn't need to reread (and then analyze it into the ground so I could avoid thinking, too), but now it looks like Strikethrough07v2 will be distracting everyone.