I don't know much about Harry Potter. I read all the books in school but not a super huge fan. But I think I can definitely say the reason why Voldemort wasn't shot would be because it would be anticlimactic and dumb to have a 7 book series end by him catching a haze of bullets.
Literature Thoughts on Harry Potter?
- Thread starter That Mystic Writer
- Start date
Murdergurl
will turn your insides into your outsides
okies. I guess the force field/warding spells totes have validation. but as to the "I can think faster than a bullet", I'm gonna hafta say no. If a sniper is shooting at you, you don't hear the bullet before you drop dead. You dont get a chance to react, and you definitely don't see it coming from 1000 meters.
But sure, magic force field specifically against bullets. I guess that does trump the weapons.
Last edited:
Murdergurl
will turn your insides into your outsides
well, yeah. obviously. But I'm not talking about franchise profits. I'm talking about logic within the margins of the fantasy world rules
Un huh.
The Great Sage
The Storyteller
How about this then - any wizard that is on a black ops 'hit list' is probably going to know it, yeah? Like, SEAL Team Six isn't going after 12 year old Ginny Weasley, right?
In that case, this powerful marked-for-death wizard is going to prepare for the eventual assault. Only unlike drug kingpins and terrorists, Mr. Bad Magic has traps that don't have a thermal signature. His wards and mines don't have tripwires or lasers to give them away.
Chances are that the wizard knows that the assault team is there the moment they set foot on the wizard's compound. The wizard might have even changed his form into a fly or something in order to see the effects of his traps up close and personal like a live action play of SAW: The Magicianing. It doesn't matter how far away the sniper is when he's been cursed to always having the sun shine directly into his optical so that he burns his eyeball every time he looks though the scope.
In practice magic will always trump technology due to the fact that technology is real and has physical limitations and magic isn't and doesn't.
Murdergurl
will turn your insides into your outsides
Well, yes. Until you hit the sci-fi genre. Then it's basically on the same level. To quote Arthur C. Clarke:
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indiscernible from magic."
The Great Sage
The Storyteller
Absolutely. The divide between sci-fi and fantasy magic is pretty blurry. Trilithium from Star Trek might as well be unicorn hair from Harry Potter.
edit: That actually reminds me of in Next Generation at least, and maybe TOS as well the doctor always asks for 'tricordrazine' for everything. Headache? Tricord. Phaser burn? Tricord. Stroke? Tricord. Dying? Tricord.
If tricordrazine isn't a health potion I don't know what.
Last edited:
Murdergurl
will turn your insides into your outsides
in the Hispanic side of my family, Vicks and Sprite are a cure-all for every ailment
Jannah
Barely holding on.
I'm a bit late to the conversation, but I just want to point out that guns would probably be ineffective against wizards anyway simply because it seems like they could medically treat any muggle inflicted wounds pretty easy. I mean, they can literally regrow bones overnight so I'm sure they could magically seal up a bullet wound.
The Great Sage
The Storyteller
Ammoharmlissicus!
Murdergurl
will turn your insides into your outsides
two words:
Hollow Points
But other points have been made that would moot the rounds in other ways, apparently
yutohase
Aspiring Mangaka
Yeah, I generally don't like JK Rowling, but I tend to "separate the art from the artist". Harry Potter as a standalone work, and not related to JK Rowling, is pretty good, except for the poorly written fanfiction that some people call a "sequel" that shall not be named. Other than that, I don't have any particular feelings about it.
Pretty Little Creature
Hello
My mother read me all the harry potter books as a child. Sometimes a few times a year. Even though JK is a disgruntled behind the times bitter old lady. Most good writers are narcissistic to agree as Orwell would say. I can appreciate the nostalgia without acknowledging or supporting JK. Which sounds weird because she's the author. But I think people would be surprised just how many good writers are honestly crap.
So harry potter will forever be a story I carry nostalgia with and will probably read to my children.
My partner and I have a hp marathon once a year as well. Might start philosophers
stone tonight
Added: what is this about a bullet killing Voldemort pfft
Guys he's already dead. He split his literal soul so many times you can't even consider him human. He died like five times before the final battle and even then harry was the last horcrux. Voldemort literally can not nor could not be killed without harrys death.
So like a bullet may kill one vessel but the old man's just like. Cool. I will just grab a piece of a soul from a locket or a snake or a person
It's not magic that keeps him living. It's the evil of giving up his soul.... Which is why harry's sacrifice kills him. Same reason love literally burns his skin when harry touched him.
It's symbolism
So harry potter will forever be a story I carry nostalgia with and will probably read to my children.
My partner and I have a hp marathon once a year as well. Might start philosophers
stone tonight
Added: what is this about a bullet killing Voldemort pfft
Guys he's already dead. He split his literal soul so many times you can't even consider him human. He died like five times before the final battle and even then harry was the last horcrux. Voldemort literally can not nor could not be killed without harrys death.
So like a bullet may kill one vessel but the old man's just like. Cool. I will just grab a piece of a soul from a locket or a snake or a person
It's not magic that keeps him living. It's the evil of giving up his soul.... Which is why harry's sacrifice kills him. Same reason love literally burns his skin when harry touched him.
It's symbolism
Last edited:
The Silent Z
Just Here
Having grew up with Harry Potter and reading the books while seeing the movies in theaters plus getting the dvd set during that time. I remain rather nostalgic and a fan of the series despite the author herself and the comments she’s made in recent years.
Pottermore always placed me in Gryffindor so I guess using that would be my house. (Not entirely sure how fitting it is but nonetheless.)
Plenty of favorite characters of mine though with this series. Tonks, Mad-Eye Moody, Sirius Black, Hermione, Lupin, among a few others. But I’d say Tonks is my favorite amongst them all.
Natasha4E
New Member
I was already an adult when the books came out, but I still love the series. I took my daughters to London for a Harry Potter vacation and it was the best vacation I ever had!
I don't care for her detective series, though. They are too long-winded. They should have really put a better editor on them. (I usually like a good crime fighting book...)
Tonks is one of my favorite characters, as well! I hate how it ended for her. That last book is so depressing.
I don't care for her detective series, though. They are too long-winded. They should have really put a better editor on them. (I usually like a good crime fighting book...)
Tonks is one of my favorite characters, as well! I hate how it ended for her. That last book is so depressing.
ChristineDestler
New Member
Read my research paper to get my thoughts on Harry Potter
CrimsonDawn
Junior Member
Dunno if this is still an unpopular opinion, but: I think it's overrated.
That said, I have a fondness for Luna, Hermione, Ron, Draco, Snape, and Minerva. I think there is a wisdom and an observance to Luna that can be overlooked at times. I think that Hermione was done dirty judging by what people say of the books, both by ending up with Ron (no offense to Ron, I just don't think they're actually all that compatible and ended up together just 'cause they already knew each other, went to school with each other and kissed that one time during a very stressful situation), and also having her ambition to free the house elves being portrayed as bad. On the other hand, there are other decisions she makes that are less admirable, which could've been called out. Ron is entertaining, relatable, and has more talent than he's sometimes made out to have. Draco represents the misguided youth, indoctrinated into an anti-semetic cult, and pushed to be their minion of evil. I find him interesting and complicated for that reason, but think he could've been fleshed out more. Snape is in a similar boat to Draco, but more represents the cycle of bullying, wherein many - though not all - bullied people either temporarily or permanently become bullies themselves, possibly out of insecurity, envy, internalised hatred, fear of weakness... any number of things. I think more could've been done to actually redeem him in his lifetime (beyond him saving Harry's neck because admittedly, it's kinda' of an extension of his job, most half-decent people would've done that if they knew Harry was in danger), rather than just killing him off and then posthumously trying to redeem him. Minerva is just... entertaining to watch. Plus, I love cats and her animagus form is a cat. We all have our biases. I also admittedly find movie!Lucius to be oddly amusing despite him being an ass. He just feels extra in a Disney villain who also happens to be a dad who spoils his kid kind of way. He's not a favourite of mine and I hate that he tried getting Buckbeak killed, but...
I wouldn't say I belong to any single house. I've thought about it, and the idea of belonging to a Harry Potter house is a lot less neat than it seems at first glance.
I can't say I agree with Rowling's stance. I won't be buying the books. Watched the movies, thought they were... okay. Better in some places, worse in others. Found some online copies of the books and I have read parts of the books in libraries, etc...
I just couldn't get into the books.
It's an intriguing world, I'll give you that. But it has so many faults that get worse the more you learn of the author behind them... and some of the characters I just don't like, or think people don't acknowledge the faults of enough.
I mean, we all know Snape's faults. We can all say that he's an ass, even though he's also done some good things, even those of us that overall like his character. I think I'm not the only one to say that his redemption wasn't executed that well, and I think him slowly coming to becoming proud of his position as potions professor and come to care for his students in a sort of Brother Bear-esque journey would've made his death that much more impactful, because Harry could've lost a genuine mentor and an almost familial figure. But that's not the route Rowling took. She didn't spend enough time on his development, or on the development of the various relationships which to me end up coming off as boring.
But besides that, there are characters like Sirius and Remus who do some reckless shit, but it's overlooked 'cuz "Snape is worse" or some poor excuse like that. It's a shame, because you are, by ignoring their faults and not allowing them to actually grow, rendering them simpler characters than they could be. Also, I can't stand how people can get angry at Snape's treatment of Harry and Ron, but then laugh at Barty Crouch's (as Mad Eye Moody) treatment of Draco in that same breath. It's good old fashion anti-house bias, the kind that Hogwarts in fairness encourages far too much. I just don't like Dumbledore either.
That said, I have a fondness for Luna, Hermione, Ron, Draco, Snape, and Minerva. I think there is a wisdom and an observance to Luna that can be overlooked at times. I think that Hermione was done dirty judging by what people say of the books, both by ending up with Ron (no offense to Ron, I just don't think they're actually all that compatible and ended up together just 'cause they already knew each other, went to school with each other and kissed that one time during a very stressful situation), and also having her ambition to free the house elves being portrayed as bad. On the other hand, there are other decisions she makes that are less admirable, which could've been called out. Ron is entertaining, relatable, and has more talent than he's sometimes made out to have. Draco represents the misguided youth, indoctrinated into an anti-semetic cult, and pushed to be their minion of evil. I find him interesting and complicated for that reason, but think he could've been fleshed out more. Snape is in a similar boat to Draco, but more represents the cycle of bullying, wherein many - though not all - bullied people either temporarily or permanently become bullies themselves, possibly out of insecurity, envy, internalised hatred, fear of weakness... any number of things. I think more could've been done to actually redeem him in his lifetime (beyond him saving Harry's neck because admittedly, it's kinda' of an extension of his job, most half-decent people would've done that if they knew Harry was in danger), rather than just killing him off and then posthumously trying to redeem him. Minerva is just... entertaining to watch. Plus, I love cats and her animagus form is a cat. We all have our biases. I also admittedly find movie!Lucius to be oddly amusing despite him being an ass. He just feels extra in a Disney villain who also happens to be a dad who spoils his kid kind of way. He's not a favourite of mine and I hate that he tried getting Buckbeak killed, but...
I wouldn't say I belong to any single house. I've thought about it, and the idea of belonging to a Harry Potter house is a lot less neat than it seems at first glance.
I can't say I agree with Rowling's stance. I won't be buying the books. Watched the movies, thought they were... okay. Better in some places, worse in others. Found some online copies of the books and I have read parts of the books in libraries, etc...
I just couldn't get into the books.
It's an intriguing world, I'll give you that. But it has so many faults that get worse the more you learn of the author behind them... and some of the characters I just don't like, or think people don't acknowledge the faults of enough.
I mean, we all know Snape's faults. We can all say that he's an ass, even though he's also done some good things, even those of us that overall like his character. I think I'm not the only one to say that his redemption wasn't executed that well, and I think him slowly coming to becoming proud of his position as potions professor and come to care for his students in a sort of Brother Bear-esque journey would've made his death that much more impactful, because Harry could've lost a genuine mentor and an almost familial figure. But that's not the route Rowling took. She didn't spend enough time on his development, or on the development of the various relationships which to me end up coming off as boring.
But besides that, there are characters like Sirius and Remus who do some reckless shit, but it's overlooked 'cuz "Snape is worse" or some poor excuse like that. It's a shame, because you are, by ignoring their faults and not allowing them to actually grow, rendering them simpler characters than they could be. Also, I can't stand how people can get angry at Snape's treatment of Harry and Ron, but then laugh at Barty Crouch's (as Mad Eye Moody) treatment of Draco in that same breath. It's good old fashion anti-house bias, the kind that Hogwarts in fairness encourages far too much. I just don't like Dumbledore either.
Jannah
Barely holding on.
I think even most of the fans will say it's at least a bit over-rated. A lot of us who still like it as adults enjoy it purely out of nostalgia. We millennials practically grew up with Harry. He was a big part of our own coming of age experiences.
XXSheepXX
New Member
Love it!
Perpetual Zen
Pneumonia Sucks
yeah if I couldn't separate story from creator I'd be limiting myself a lot
there are a ton of famous writters who have quesionable morals and still
made a deep impact as far as literature is concerned.
Harry potter will always be a part of my childhood. My mom read like majority of the books to me growing up lol it became a tradition, I mean I value that. I think I'm a Hufflepuff for sure
there are a ton of famous writters who have quesionable morals and still
made a deep impact as far as literature is concerned.
Harry potter will always be a part of my childhood. My mom read like majority of the books to me growing up lol it became a tradition, I mean I value that. I think I'm a Hufflepuff for sure
nerdy tangents
One Thousand Club
Former librarian here, Joanne is literally the reason young adult as a genre was invented. It’s not that books aimed at children didn’t exist prior to Harry Potter (obviously you had things like Sweet Valley High, Baby Sitters Club, Nancy Drew, the Hardy Boys, etc.)
But used to be the two genres were children or adult. So if nothing else you wouldn’t have Hunger Games, Twilight, their assorted knockoffs, etc. without Harry Potter.
Now do I think it’s the height of literature? Heck do I even think it’s the best of the YA genre specifically? No.
But I think something doesn’t have to be perfect or even good to be impactful.
I love the Sweet Valley High series. It is objectively trash. It’s poorly written, problematic, and soap opera levels of melodramatic. But it warms my heart and makes my happy so who cares?
You can love something while also acknowledging it has flaws.
Perpetual Zen
Pneumonia Sucks
Oh man sweet valley high is brining serious nostalgic vibes
nerdy tangents
One Thousand Club
I listen to podcasts going through every book in the series at work and it’s like.. this is my version of reality tv. I can’t watch actual reality tv because it feels too manufactured but I am like this is basically the written version and it’s fun ad heck.
Tea and Cartography
She tastes like apple juice and peach
Actively separating the art from the artist, I grew up with HP (the movies, not the books), and it's always had a special place in my heart.
My friends have always placed me in either Slytherin or Hufflepuff, and I embrace that.
I've also participated in many a HP 1v1 and group roleplays.
Hell, I've even played Hogwarts Legacy and shed a few tears because I felt like my inner child was living out her dreams at last.
A part of me misses the franchise, and I will occasionally go back to watch the movies. But another part of me doesn't want to bother touching the franchise again because of the weird tropes in roleplays I've seen, and having experienced receiving death threats for enjoying something from my childhood.
My friends have always placed me in either Slytherin or Hufflepuff, and I embrace that.
I've also participated in many a HP 1v1 and group roleplays.
Hell, I've even played Hogwarts Legacy and shed a few tears because I felt like my inner child was living out her dreams at last.
A part of me misses the franchise, and I will occasionally go back to watch the movies. But another part of me doesn't want to bother touching the franchise again because of the weird tropes in roleplays I've seen, and having experienced receiving death threats for enjoying something from my childhood.
Waynwood
New Member
It's solid fantasy, up there. Some are better.
