Harry Potter is better than people give it credit for and is accidentally based. All the kids at school are armed and taught to competently inflict violence on each other. The state attempting to remove this training is presented as an affront to society itself, so the kids start their own militia with a secret shooting range. Heirarchy through both age and appointed ranks is strictly enforced and respected. Cat ladies are properly presented as broken and depraved. Not all people are equal, as some are born with special gifts that make them superior.
The movies completely leave out the entire SPEW storyline as well, which shows us that House Elves really are a slave race, and they like it that way, whether our tender sensibilities like it or not.
That's pretty much all the House Elves wanted, was a bit of respect for who they were, and decent treatment. Which is basically the least anyone could possibly ask for or expect.
Exactly. It's why they HATED her, and began to refuse to do anything in their dorm, and left Dobby the Oddball to do all the chores there, because he didn't follow normal House Elf social conventions - he was basically a hippie in their eyes.
I have to disagree on her intended demographic. They were definitely meant for people the same age as the main characters, the early teens. And I think the first few worked well as "my first doorstopper." But you're right about her skills as a writer. And unfortunately, a lot of the people obsessed with the series now never branched out into other young adult fiction or moved on to more complex works as they grew up.
PJ is worse than Harry Potter, I agree in that. The author actually does fill the story with the kind of muh representation lunacy Just Kidding Rowling likes to throw in later.
Like the newest series of this bullshit mythology bastardisation has a shapeshifter character who is not just a shapeshifter, she is "genderfluid". The protagonist's gf or something. The author sounds legitimately braindead.
I'd disagree. I grew up with the first five Percy Jackson books (which is weird as I'm British. You'd think I'd be more of a Harry Potter guy in my youth) and I reckoned the author had a much clearer idea of where he was going than Rowling, and really understood Greek mythology (Hades being a tired bureaucrat who doesn't want too much more death as the underworld is overloaded, gives me life).
However, what came after...for the sake of my childhood, I just pretend it ended at book five.
To be fair, Rick Riordan is unintentionally based when it comes to religion. He wrote himself into a corner where:
The gods' power comes from how influential they currently are on humans
Catholicism is real. God and Jesus are real in Percy Jackson with multiple references to them and characters that are worshippers of the Abrahamic religions.
This makes the Christian God that leftists hate so much canonically the most powerful and all-encompassing being in Percy Jackson, and the gods just try to ignore this by not talking about it and getting annoyed when it comes up. It's a punch on the face to leftists who like Percy Jackson because they are pretend pagans or whatever.
I don't believe Riordan intended this what so ever but it is hilarious.
No, the very few times he is mentioned, it's with the pretext that he is so above the pagan gods that he doesn't even consider them.
In Rick's Norse mythology series Thor complains that Jesus Christ never accepted his invitation for them to battle.
In the Egyptian series, the main characters are magicians, and talking to some older magicians, they complain about that time Moses beat them in front of the Pharaoh.
Stuff like that.
It's just supposed to be one off jokes, but each instance is an instance of the pagan gods getting their asses kicked lol.
There are too many people who treat the series that way. Like it's some classic above all classics that defines its genre. But it's really not that. I liked it, but in my opinion, it's no Lord of the Rings, and there are better YA fantasy series from this time. One of which is Fablehaven. It targets the exact same audience and has magic and all that, including a magical world hidden among the real world, but it's just a better series. Its themes are more coherent, and it's just a better crafted story overall. HP ending is especially bad. And yet most people probably don't even know what Fablehaven is. The phenomenon of Harry Potter and JK Rowling doesn't make much sense to me. It far too highly regarded.
I manage to ignore the fact that there are somehow fans of that series most days of the year, and then, in really aggravating ways, the fans rear their ugly heads again to shout and boost this ridiculous series beyond what is acceptable.
They just really fucking hate someone enjoying something they don't, don't they?
Harry Potter is a good children’s book series. As in they get children to read and they enjoy them. The issue is those same kids who become adults and never read any other books. and for some reason they think that these fictional books are some guide to how life is.
It's also just too highly regarded as a children's book. It's good, but people treat it like it's some amazing thing that is above similar YA fantasy series. But it's not. It's not even the best of YA fantasy from our time.
Potter is better though, Rowling at least waited until after the series was long over to make characters retroactively gay, and the fifth book was based in how it portrayed the media-government complex.
Neither can compare to the comedy that is Discworld or true masterpieces such as Narnia and LOTR though. Or actual Greco-Roman Mythology.
Harry Potter is better than people give it credit for and is accidentally based. All the kids at school are armed and taught to competently inflict violence on each other. The state attempting to remove this training is presented as an affront to society itself, so the kids start their own militia with a secret shooting range. Heirarchy through both age and appointed ranks is strictly enforced and respected. Cat ladies are properly presented as broken and depraved. Not all people are equal, as some are born with special gifts that make them superior.
The movies completely leave out the entire SPEW storyline as well, which shows us that House Elves really are a slave race, and they like it that way, whether our tender sensibilities like it or not.
"I got my name from president Jeff Davis"
Amazing video. Jefferson Davis was one of the leading advocates of better treatment for slaves.
That's pretty much all the House Elves wanted, was a bit of respect for who they were, and decent treatment. Which is basically the least anyone could possibly ask for or expect.
Exactly. It's why they HATED her, and began to refuse to do anything in their dorm, and left Dobby the Oddball to do all the chores there, because he didn't follow normal House Elf social conventions - he was basically a hippie in their eyes.
And the corrupt government and the media are in bed, covering for each other.
The government fucking with the school is presented as a clear negative.
I have to disagree on her intended demographic. They were definitely meant for people the same age as the main characters, the early teens. And I think the first few worked well as "my first doorstopper." But you're right about her skills as a writer. And unfortunately, a lot of the people obsessed with the series now never branched out into other young adult fiction or moved on to more complex works as they grew up.
This is the best analysis of HP I've ever read.
PJ is worse than Harry Potter, I agree in that. The author actually does fill the story with the kind of muh representation lunacy Just Kidding Rowling likes to throw in later.
Like the newest series of this bullshit mythology bastardisation has a shapeshifter character who is not just a shapeshifter, she is "genderfluid". The protagonist's gf or something. The author sounds legitimately braindead.
I'd disagree. I grew up with the first five Percy Jackson books (which is weird as I'm British. You'd think I'd be more of a Harry Potter guy in my youth) and I reckoned the author had a much clearer idea of where he was going than Rowling, and really understood Greek mythology (Hades being a tired bureaucrat who doesn't want too much more death as the underworld is overloaded, gives me life).
However, what came after...for the sake of my childhood, I just pretend it ended at book five.
To be fair, Rick Riordan is unintentionally based when it comes to religion. He wrote himself into a corner where:
This makes the Christian God that leftists hate so much canonically the most powerful and all-encompassing being in Percy Jackson, and the gods just try to ignore this by not talking about it and getting annoyed when it comes up. It's a punch on the face to leftists who like Percy Jackson because they are pretend pagans or whatever.
I don't believe Riordan intended this what so ever but it is hilarious.
No, the very few times he is mentioned, it's with the pretext that he is so above the pagan gods that he doesn't even consider them.
In Rick's Norse mythology series Thor complains that Jesus Christ never accepted his invitation for them to battle.
In the Egyptian series, the main characters are magicians, and talking to some older magicians, they complain about that time Moses beat them in front of the Pharaoh.
Stuff like that.
It's just supposed to be one off jokes, but each instance is an instance of the pagan gods getting their asses kicked lol.
There are too many people who treat the series that way. Like it's some classic above all classics that defines its genre. But it's really not that. I liked it, but in my opinion, it's no Lord of the Rings, and there are better YA fantasy series from this time. One of which is Fablehaven. It targets the exact same audience and has magic and all that, including a magical world hidden among the real world, but it's just a better series. Its themes are more coherent, and it's just a better crafted story overall. HP ending is especially bad. And yet most people probably don't even know what Fablehaven is. The phenomenon of Harry Potter and JK Rowling doesn't make much sense to me. It far too highly regarded.
Rowling didn't write it.
Ever seen that episode of The Simpsons where they write a book? I always thought that was a hint about JK.
Source?
They just really fucking hate someone enjoying something they don't, don't they?
Eh, sure, that there's a lot of them doesn't mean I'm not still game to tell them all, in no uncertain terms, to fuck off though.
My first priority is where the spiteful joy parasites are most numerous and successful, can work down the rest of the list later.
Harry Potter is a good children’s book series. As in they get children to read and they enjoy them. The issue is those same kids who become adults and never read any other books. and for some reason they think that these fictional books are some guide to how life is.
It's also just too highly regarded as a children's book. It's good, but people treat it like it's some amazing thing that is above similar YA fantasy series. But it's not. It's not even the best of YA fantasy from our time.
Potter is better though, Rowling at least waited until after the series was long over to make characters retroactively gay, and the fifth book was based in how it portrayed the media-government complex.
Neither can compare to the comedy that is Discworld or true masterpieces such as Narnia and LOTR though. Or actual Greco-Roman Mythology.