Love her or hate her (and my opinions are mixed), I must confess, JK Rowling was a huge influence on why I didn’t become a regular author. No shade on people who get what they paid for, but the young reader crowd is just so gimmicky, and not in a good way, and you see that with a lot of works like Percy Jackson and Twilight (but also predominantly with Rowling’s work). How do you compete in such a no-rules game?
So then let’s talk about one of the cores of the issue. People often have an epiphany when divulging into Harry Potter, and they think “huh, what’s the deal with this if that thing is how it is”. While noting that conflicts in literary analysis don’t always reflect something that doesn’t add up and that it could be a hiccup in details/semantics, the questions themselves don’t go away. And there’s nothing that matches the amount of those having to do with Harry Potter. What example of which strikes you as the most overlooked?
If Rowling herself ever notices that I’m bringing this up, let it be known I do think of her work as a reskinned Brothers Grimm in the universe of The Worst Witch and that I’m collaborating with another author (Samantha Rinne) whose work I would argue deserves Rowling’s prestige if Rowling’s work deserves it. Thanks (and here is where I run for the hills).
There’s no fucking way that a kid raised from infancy like Harry was, in a abusive hateful household that treated him like dirt, would have enough strength of character to pull shit like the “Give it here, Malfoy” scene after having been out of the Dursley household for less than a couple weeks. Think about how the Dursleys would have reacted every time young Harry tried to stand up for himself. It would have been nonstop physical and mental abuse, all aimed at making him more subservient. It would take a miracle for a kid like that to be even vaguely functional as a person, and he certainly wouldn’t have the ability to stand up for himself, let alone others.
Wizards are just built different. In Harry’s case, he comes from a line of wizards that basically stood up to the metaphorical concept of death itself
Shits wack yo
Well this kind of got answered in the game of Hogwarts legacy.
I always was curious how they Imbued physical objects with magical properties.
Let’s say, the evanescent cupboards
So these are created as a pair and connected to each other in the sense that whatever you put in one, shows up in the other
It’s basically an actual functional teleporter.
Leaving aside the specific instructions for use, this thing is a massive hack.
So in the games they do sort of explain that you can add magical properties to your clothes by using magical beasts resources.
So maybe the evanescent cupboards are made of one of those beasts that teleport a short distance
Same as the paintings and such
Why are there socioeconomic classes on a society that can literally create or at least multiply any resources at will?
They clearly state in the books that they cannot create resources at will. The resources need to exist first
Clearly you have not been studying for your OWLS. Focus on Gamp’s transfiguration laws
Why doesn’t Hagrid, who is the largest of the characters, simply eat Voldemort?
The spell system is wack, which opens up all sorts of plot holes. Want Harry’s invisibility cloak? Accio invisibility cloak! Boom, Harry’s visible and you’ve got his cloak. I doubt that Rowling ever played D&D.
This one is kind of accounted for. It’s implied there are protections that can be put in place to prevent it from being summoned with Accio.
It is also explained that that particular cloak is immune to charms
The plot has already being discussed at length. I want to talk about quidditch.
Quick recap, in quidditch, scoring goals scores 10 or 20 points, catching the snitch scores 150 points, and ends the game. This effectively means that the only way a team can catch the snitch and lose is if they are over 150 points behind.
As a result of this, logically the seaker should not attempt to catch the snitch if the score is this unfavourable, meaning the game is always decided by the seaker, and nothing anyone else is doing remotely matters. Remember also we see the audience is rarely able to see what the seeker is doing from the stands.
Now you may say “what about the world cup in book 4, Krumm catches the snitch and still loses”. This can only be attributed to Krumm got mad at his team, or maybe bored, otherwise he should just wait and see if his team can score a goal or two. If the other team’s seaker catches the snitch you lose anyway, so why even try until it’s going to win you the game? Maybe he was showing off to Hermione.
We also know for certain that this happens very rarely, as the odds given to the twins by Ludo Bagman are very high, leading to a big payout. Therefore quidditch is entirely decided by something that happens well out of sight of the audience, and would be terrible to watch or play.
As an aside, the rules around catching the snitch leading to a draw are never mentioned, but I assume they have some penalty shootout system
Well, we’ll have to ignore the gaping plot-induced stupidity on display by practically everyone throughout the entire story, because without it the books would have been quite short. So setting that aside, because I’m sure it’s been trampled to death already.
The complete unwillingness for the wizarding world to utilize even basic Muggle technologies and knowledge is absolutely baffling. It’s insinuated that they don’t need Muggle things because they can substitute them with magic which is “equivalent.” This is self-evidently hokum.
These idiots still write with quills, read by candlelight, don’t use the Internet, and despite having literal magic at their disposal their communication systems (such as they are) are laughably inferior to common Muggle ones even in the context of the time period in which the story is supposedly set. Come on. Owls?
Magic users demonstrate basically no understanding of science and are all demonstrably the worse off for it, still having a nearly medieval understanding of how the world works, and rely on magic as a crutch to weakly compensate. This even when it’s obvious to an outside observer that a basic piece of mundane knowledge or technology would be not only easier and significantly less dangerous than whatever the fuck their homegrown solution is, but also more effective. This is treated in supplementary works by Rowling as if it’s a point of pride by wizards and witches who deliberately eschew anything of Muggle origin – even if this means going to great lengths to shoot themselves in the foot simply to maintain that attitude of aloofness, which only serves to underscore the sheer stupidity apparently heavily ingrained into magical culture.
The fact that neither Harry nor none of the other Muggleborn kids are puzzled by this, nor why they apparently deliberately fail to bring so much as a common yellow #2 pencil with them from the mundane world out of sheer habit makes zero sense. (And yes, this is touched upon in the already recommended Methods of Rationality.)
Magical consumer goods are also seriously customer hostile. Who the fuck thought even half of those things were a desirable marketable product? Is there an evil wizard version of Willy Wonka lurking around someplace? Think of all the pocket change a Muggleborn lad could make by bringing a case of jelly beans with him to school to sell to his classmates where you don’t have a one in twenty chance of one of them tasting like earwax. Or chocolates that can’t hop away from you when you aren’t looking. I mean, for fuck’s sake.
And following from the above, everyone is so concerned about the damage to the karma done by the unforgivable spells, or whatever, which is supposedly why nobody goes to all-out war with the Death Eaters. But then no one gets the brain cells together to realize that Voldemort and especially his goons are surely vulnerable to conventional weapons. All anyone has to do is camp in a corner with a shotgun and then call out they-who-must-not-be-named, enticing them to appear to simply get Swiss Cheesed before having clue one what’s going on. Maybe Voldy can’t be truly killed by any form of physical harm, but the entire premise of the story begins with the observation that he can be put to considerable inconvenience, putting him down for quite some time, and thus buy the protagonists plenty of time to figure out his stupid riddles and find all his horcruxes. Then simply drive over whatever’s left of him with a steamroller.
I think there’s a bit in the first book where Harry says his parents were shot, and Hagrid laughs and says no muggle gun could have killed them.
But like, why not? It’s never explained. I’m sure if they survived being shot, magic medicine would sort them out pretty quickly. But there’s no reassign to think a gun couldn’t kill them. Wizards struggle to react fast enough to block spell s most of the time, and bullets seem to move faster than that.
I think the hardest part would be successfully ambushing Voldy, but no reason to think a gun wouldn’t fuck him up if you can hit him.
I mean this is the same race of people who have babies launched on purpose from high buildings just to see them bounce harmlessly to see if they are magical or not
To be fair, I think that’s to check if their reflexes include unknowingly using magic to protect themselves. That should only work if they’ve perceived the danger, like putting out your hands to stop a fall.
Shooting someone would (if they’re being properly ambushed) usually result in them being shot before they realise it, so it wouldn’t matter if they’re magic.
But if they do realise they’re being shot at, then why defence magic at all? Just use your innate magical reflexes to avoid death!? Why the need to learn how to block spells?
So either guns would work, or they wouldn’t and it’s not explained at all.
Also Hermione slaps Malloy at one point. If his innate defensive magic reflexes didn’t kick in then, no reason to think they would if he was hit with both barrels from a shotgun to the chest.
Eh, I mean, that can re grow bone marrow, tissues, bottle souls, repair physical damage and so on. Worst case they apparate to their hospital
Bullets would be an inconvenience at most