Harry Potter: the good, the bad, and the ugly

[Frosty]

If Hermione Granger is a Gryffindor, then so am I.


One of the major flaws of the Harry Potter books, IMO, is that JK Rowling doesn't ever bother trying to make Slytherin not seem evil. There are a handful of non-evil Slytherins, but they're shown as an exception to the general rule.

I figure the most basic traits that one would need to have, to be a Slytherin, would be Machiavellianism and a desire for power. Racism would be more of a cultural problem associated with the house, than a necessary Slytherin trait.

I actually believe that I read somewhere that she originally made all the slytherins evil because she was basing them on people that she didn't particularly like herself. Snape was an old teacher, Malfoy a bully, ect(less sure on the Malfoy part but...), so that when it came time to categorize them-this part is just a guess-she just sort of wrapped around the idea of a blanket black and white moral standard. Gryffindors good and Slytherins bad.

And Rowling herself never liked the slytherins, so when fans repeatedly started to favor them and demand that the become more dimensional she had to sort of improvise beyond what she would have prefferred. But still, since she still did have that bias towards them, she did not particularly want to fully redeem them- as that might become liable to be a reflection upon her real life and unresolved conflicts with her own personal 'slytherins'-so yeah she passive aggressively manipulated it so that while fans were satisfied, the good was never really truly able to reach the same planes as the evil-there still was something 'off' and 'wrong' about them, just her motivations became a bit harder to question.

But yes, she did introduce or try to, different interpretations-resoning-change-of people throughout time. But there was a definate bias.

Anyways though, I really disliked the whole golden trio. They never really stopped to think anything through, and the drama upon drama just to me seemed to be a bit much, a bit distracting, and it just didn't really enamor me to any of the characters. It was overplayed but yet still riciculously shallow and one sided.

I would say that Luna, Neville, Snape, and Dumbledore were my all time favorite. I also liked the Dursleys, the effect they had on Harry and what was behind their treatment.

 

[Riva]

Harry and Luna would have been good. I just said Harry and Hermione because anything would have been better than Hermione and Ron.

Yeah, Ron and Hermione sucked. The author completely failed to build any chemistry between the two characters as with Ginny and Harry. I also failed to see any chemistry between Grindlewald and Dumbledore until she mentioned after the series was over that Dumblredore is gay and that he liked him.

It was slowly occurring to me over the years that Rowlin might have not been a very good writer. Either that or she failed at building character and chemistry. I think we can all agree than Harry's character lacked substance.

However, she did find a magic formula of background. How can a wizarding school ever fail? Must give her credit there.

Also, I've noticed - as I mentioned above regarding Luna - that on those instances she found characters with good exploitable personalities she didn't give them enough screen time. Luna, Serius...

One of the major flaws of the Harry Potter books, IMO, is that JK Rowling doesn't ever bother trying to make Slytherin not seem evil. There are a handful of non-evil Slytherins, but they're shown as an exception to the general rule. .

The core of Slytherine is shitty. They are vain!!! That itself should be enough to disassociate oneself from them.

 

[Frosty]

Yeah, Ron and Hermione sucked. The author completely failed to build any chemistry between the two characters as with Ginny and Harry. I also failed to see any chemistry between Grindlewald and Dumbledore until she mentioned after the series was over that Dumblredore is gay and that he liked him.

It was slowly occurring to me over the years that Rowlin might have not been a very good writer. Either that or she failed at building character and chemistry. I think we can all agree than Harry's character lacked substance.

However, she did find a magic formula of background. How can a wizarding school ever fail? Must give her credit there.

Also, I've noticed - as I mentioned above regarding Luna - that on those instances she found characters with good exploitable personalities she didn't give them enough screen time. Luna, Serius...

Yeah and now it seems as if she is really just trying to keep the gravy train rolling by expoiting her 'powers' as the author and just randomly popping in whatever little detail she feels like to further an interest. She could say that Harry Potter was secretly a government experiment, that magic was built underground in a lab, and it would have to be true because she is 'the author'. It kind of takes away from any individual interpretation there might be-any magic- and just fills the series with a bunch of answers to questions people never really wanted to ask.

 

[EJCC]

The core of Slytherine is shitty. They are vain!!! That itself should be enough to disassociate oneself from them.

Well, Gryffindors can be pretty awful too. Consider James Potter. He was a bully and a troll.

 

[BadOctopus]

Yeah and now it seems as if she is really just trying to keep the gravy train rolling by expoiting her 'powers' as the author and just randomly popping in whatever little detail she feels like to further an interest. She could say that Harry Potter was secretly a government experiment, that magic was built underground in a lab, and it would have to be true because she is 'the author'. It kind of takes away from any individual interpretation there might be-any magic- and just fills the series with a bunch of answers to questions people never really wanted to ask.

There's actually no such thing as magic. Turns out, it was midichlorians all along.

 

[EJCC]

There's actually no such thing as magic. Turns out, it was midichlorians all along.

 

[Coriolis]

It was slowly occurring to me over the years that Rowlin might have not been a very good writer. Either that or she failed at building character and chemistry. I think we can all agree than Harry's character lacked substance.

Actually, though I dislike Harry and think he does many stupid things, in literary terms he is a very good character. He is almost an everyman, an ordinary person put into extraordinary circumstances, doing the best he can, relying on his friends, and often making bad choices. It can be frustrating for the reader or viewer because we know better, we can see it coming, but he doesn't and takes the fall nonetheless.

Same with Sirius, and several other characters I don't care for personally but that do their job well within the story line.

The core of Slytherine is shitty. They are vain!!! That itself should be enough to disassociate oneself from them.

To the extent that Salazar Slytherin was an elitist and infused his house with that mentality, then yes. To the extent that Slytherins far in the future stopped following that (witness Snape and Voldemort himself, neither pureblood), it is a bum rap. We see everything mostly through Harry's eyes, though, and since he has obvious reasons for hating all things Slytherin, this colors the impression we get. Even he comes to see the error of this view, however, as we see in the epilogue.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

To the extent that Salazar Slytherin was an elitist and infused his house with that mentality, then yes. To the extent that Slytherins far in the future stopped following that (witness Snape and Voldemort himself, neither pureblood), it is a bum rap. We see everything mostly through Harry's eyes, though, and since he has obvious reasons for hating all things Slytherin, this colors the impression we get. Even he comes to see the error of this view, however, as we see in the epilogue.

The thing about Voldemort (and Snape too, IIRC) is that he had major issues with being mixed. They saw it as something to be ashamed of, not something to embrace. Perhaps if the Wizarding world hadn't looked down on muggles, Tom Riddle would have never gone bad. Maybe Tom Riddle's issue was that he tried too hard to fit into an elitist society.

 

[Riva]

Actually, though I dislike Harry and think he does many stupid things, in literary terms he is a very good character. He is almost an everyman, an ordinary person put into extraordinary circumstances, doing the best he can, relying on his friends, and often making bad choices. It can be frustrating for the reader or viewer because we know better, we can see it coming, but he doesn't and takes the fall nonetheless.

Same with Sirius, and several other characters I don't care for personally but that do their job well within the story line.


To the extent that Salazar Slytherin was an elitist and infused his house with that mentality, then yes. To the extent that Slytherins far in the future stopped following that (witness Snape and Voldemort himself, neither pureblood), it is a bum rap. We see everything mostly through Harry's eyes, though, and since he has obvious reasons for hating all things Slytherin, this colors the impression we get. Even he comes to see the error of this view, however, as we see in the epilogue.

Although i felt frustrated at him for his lack of thinking sometimes, i've also realize that he was just a kid akl through out the series. When i was as old as harry i was really stupid. Infact with little information he had and the pressure he was under he did quite well and he had balls.

So no complaints there.

 

[Coriolis]

The thing about Voldemort (and Snape too, IIRC) is that he had major issues with being mixed. They saw it as something to be ashamed of, not something to embrace. Perhaps if the Wizarding world hadn't looked down on muggles, Tom Riddle would have never gone bad. Maybe Tom Riddle's issue was that he tried too hard to fit into an elitist society.

Perhaps, but in Slytherin's original vision, neither Voldemort nor Snape would be suitable candidates for his house. Apparently the sorting hat thought otherwise. Note that it didn't sort Peter Pettigrew into Slytherin, however evil he turned out to be.

 

[senza tema]

Well, Gryffindors can be pretty awful too. Consider James Potter. He was a bully and a troll.

As was Sirius.

I really like Sirius but objectively, he was pretty awful. I just harbor affection for a particular variety of manchild.

 

[Showbread]

As was Sirius.

I really like Sirius but objectively, he was pretty awful. I just harbor affection for a particular variety of manchild.

I have such a spot for both him and James. Some of their actions were inexcusable, but I think aside from the Snape business they were more mischievous than malicious. And I have to think that if kind individuals like Remus and Lily loved them they couldn't have actually been that bad.

 

[Riva]

Well, Gryffindors can be pretty awful too. Consider James Potter. He was a bully and a troll.

As was Sirius.

I really like Sirius but objectively, he was pretty awful. I just harbor affection for a particular variety of manchild.

They were both assholes. That is true. In Sirius's defence his school was where he escaped his racist family. And there were people like Snape there who were obviously pure blood racists.

Also, we often forget that Snape was an asshole while at school because he ended up being remembered as a tormented lover. I think he even made racist remarks at Lily.

He was an asshole and a racist though it might have been amplified by the fact that his father was shit and Lily (his crush) never loved him. So he might have become a bit racist. That happens a lot to kids that age. She doesn't like me, I hate the world and I hate everyone like her. Actually it happens to us too.

Snape even used to be a tattletale remember? Oh and he was the one who passed information about the prediction about Harry to Voldemort. But that's way after I know.

But anyway James's and Sirius's bullying of Snape wasn't unfounded though they pushed it too far. It happens. The bullies (Snape was a tattletale racist remember) becomes bullied and the heroes end up becoming the bullies.

There was a nice family guy episode regarding that subject which I think was based on a movie called Revenge of the Nerds - which I've never watched -.

 

[á´…eparted]

I have such a spot for both him and James. Some of their actions were inexcusable, but I think aside from the Snape business they were more mischievous than malicious. And I have to think that if kind individuals like Remus and Lily loved them they couldn't have actually been that bad.

I have only read the first 3 books (seen all the movies) but as far as I know from that, and other things I have read, James is perhaps one of the most insufferable horrible person in the series. I'm sorry, but his "good" qualities do not come close to overriding his shittyness. I just despise that kind of personality. UGH. It's horrible. By extension I dislike Lily for putting up and marrying him.

 

[Showbread]

I have only read the first 3 books (seen all the movies) but as far as I know from that, and other things I have read, James is perhaps one of the most insufferable horrible person in the series. I'm sorry, but his "good" qualities do not come close to overriding his shittyness. I just despise that kind of personality. UGH. It's horrible. By extension I dislike Lily for putting up and marrying him.

We're not friends anymore.

Just kidding. Kind of.

 

[Qlip]

I have only read the first 3 books (seen all the movies) but as far as I know from that, and other things I have read, James is perhaps one of the most insufferable horrible person in the series. I'm sorry, but his "good" qualities do not come close to overriding his shittyness. I just despise that kind of personality. UGH. It's horrible. By extension I dislike Lily for putting up and marrying him.

I really do dislike it when people compromise their own integrity and conveniently overlook major faults in their mates, cuz love.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Quick question for you. Who was worse, James Potter or Voldemort?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

There's also Quirrel who was a Ravenclaw but was something of a coward, so he decided to side with Voldemort.

 

[Showbread]

Quick question for you. Who was worse, James Potter or Voldemort?

Neither, Umbridge. Umbridge is objectively the worst person in the entire series.

 

[EJCC]

Quick question for you. Who was worse, James Potter or Voldemort?

Obviously Voldemort, because he's actually evil, whereas James Potter is a good-hearted douchebag. (Sorry [MENTION=19948]Showbread[/MENTION], whether he meant well or not, I don't think I would have gotten along with him IRL.)

By extension I dislike Lily for putting up and marrying him.

I really do dislike it when people compromise their own integrity and conveniently overlook major faults in their mates, cuz love.

+1

It's a struggle for me not to think less of people, for being close friends with people I hate. I usually end up having to see the good in both parties, as a coping mechanism. Seeing it as, "just because I don't want to be around them, doesn't mean they're a bad person". I've had to do this with my ENFP bestie (who is good friends with one of my middle school arch-nemeses) and my INTP roommate (who is engaged to someone who I dislike more and more every day).