#hp discussion

[farsight-the-char]

The two most important literary analysis to come from our (tumblr) other, 4chan.

Harry Potter and the JRK's Politics and "I get Twilight now"

[adhemara]

Why are people so against Harry and Hermione having high-profile jobs at the ministry?

You're going to tell me that teenagers who had their lives shaped by politics wouldn't want to take control of them for the better? They saw first hand how the truth can be ignored in favour of opportunities and you want to tell me they will let other random people control that position of power in the future? That they wouldn't fight for better policies? That they wouldn't do anything to make it happen?

They hated those who were in the office like Fudge. They didn't hate the institution that is the Minister or Ministry.

Thinking that they hate everything about the ministry is like thinking British people who hate Theresa May hate the PM as a post and the Monarchy as a whole. Doesn't make sense.

Of course they would want to be part of rebuilding the country after the war and that goes by being a member of one of the Ministry's government bodies.

Hermione would love to fight for elves' rights by lobbying to pass social laws. Harry would love to investigate dark artefacts/magics/death eaters to prevent them from doing any more harm.

It makes sense for them to be ministry officials (especially under Kingsley who is much more liberal) and it makes sense for them to pursue such careers.

But genuinely asking, why are people so against it?

[insertcpnhere]

Do you think if Dumbledore died earlier(say... ootp or earlier in hbp), that the war would have ended up different?

And how?

Obviously, there's the issue of how Harry would find out about the horcruxes... and of course, whether Voldemort would move on the Ministry earlier...

And of course, they can't touch Harry until he's 17 regardless of if Dumbledore is alive...

I wanna hear thoughts. For no reason. Just because.

👀 nothing suspicious

[diezynueve10-9]

HARRY POTTER BOOKS ANALYSIS (Philosopher's Stone part 1)

Reread Philosopher’s Stone for the first time in almost a decade and… yeah. I have Thoughts. This isn’t meant as hate—I do like Harry Potter—mostly confusion and frustration, plus genuine curiosity about how others interpret these moments. If you’ve got headcanons or explanations, I’d love to hear them. 

I wrote this as I read, so it’s a page by page analysis.

P.14: McG says Dumbledore’s powers are comparable to those of Voldemort but that he's “too noble to use them”. (Wouldn’t it be noble to take Voldemort out once and for all?)

P.16: Hagrid talks fondly of Sirius when asked how he got the motorbike. Which means that, by the time Harry was delivered to the Dursleys, Sirius wasn't yet in Azkaban—or even under suspicion. (Since Sirius was the primary legal guardian after Harry’s parents passed, could what Dumbledore did be considered kidnapping?)

P.37: Petunia and Dudley merely dislike Harry, whereas Vernon is crazy enough to have them on the run for days and make them sleep in a shack in the middle of the sea during a storm—disregarding his own family's health and possibly their life, all to keep the wizards away. (A bit extreme, no?)

P.48: Dumbledore turns a blind eye on wrongdoing and lawbreaking when it suits him—allowing Hagrid to do magic outside the school (when technically, he shouldn’t even have a wand) and there being no repercussions to the fact he put a pig tail on Dudley and left the Dursleys to deal with it. (How do you explain to a Muggle doctor why your son has a pig tail?) 

P.52: Some of the books they need for their first year don't go with the lessons they will actually have:

-The Standard Book of Spells (Grade 1) by Miranda Goshawk — Charms

-A History of Magic by Bathilda Bagshot — History

-Magical Theory by Adalbert Waffling — ? 

-A Beginner’s Guide to Transfiguration by Emeric Switch — Transfiguration

-One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi by Phyllida Spore — Herbology

-Magical Drafts and Potions by Arsenius Jigger — Potions

-Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them by Newt Scamander — ? (They can't take Care of Magical Creatures until 3rd year)

-The Dark Forces: A Guide to Self-Protection by Quentin Trimble — DADA

They apparently don't need a book for Astronomy but need to buy their own telescope. Or maybe Magical theory is the Astronomy book since it's a more theoretical aspect of magic?

P.55: Hagrid says Quirrell was fine until he took a year off, and he's been scared of everything ever since. I believe he's scared of the power Voldemort holds over him—and scared of anyone finding out. There's a lot going wrong with Quirrell. For starters, the way Hagrid talks about him implies he's been the DADA professor for some time now. Wasn’t the position cursed so no one could keep it for more than a year? The only explanation I can think of is that, having a figment of Riddle’s soul merged with Quirrell, the jinx would recognise Voldy—not Quirrel—as the professor. But then, if there are rumors about the position being cursed by Voldemort himself, were the other professors not even a little sus that the curse just went away? It’s also strange that he underwent such an extreme change in behavior and Dumbledore or someone didn't recommend him to see a mind healer before trusting him with teaching kids how to defend themselves. (Dumbledore might be a great wizard, but he’s extremely negligent and irresponsible)

P.61: despite being accepting of Muggle-borns and not wanting to enslave Muggles—or whatever it was Grindelwald and Voldemort wanted to do—, even the “nice” people in the “bright” side, such as Hagrid, are extremely prejudiced against non-magical people. When Harry tells Hagrid about Draco asking if his parents were wizards, Hagrid reacts disgusted and offended on Harry's behalf, and tries to elevate Lily by putting Petunia down—not for her terrible personality but because of her Muggle nature. 

This could imply that most of the wizarding population pretends to be okay with Muggles but, even though they don't say it outright, most of them see them as lesser beings. In this case, I think even someone like Hagrid shares the pure-blood concept that Muggles shouldn't mix with wizards. The difference is that pure-bloods defend their position, while others—not wanting to be lumped in with what they see as “the rotten high-class” —are less outspoken about it.

That last take might be a little extrme, but that's how I felt while reading. I'm used to finding Dumbledore bashing, but I didn't pay attention to those who preach equality for Muggle-borns but use the word Muggle as an insult until the moment of making this post.

No matter how amazing the concept of magic is, society will always find a way to be terrible, I guess😅.

[petalsonparchment]

There is a clear moral distinction between killing in self-defense or protection and taking the life of someone who poses no immediate threat. Killing for protection is often seen as a necessary act in extreme circumstances, while killing without such justification is considered morally wrong because it lacks the imperative of defense or survival.

Given Snape’s past as a Death Eater, it’s highly likely that he has taken lives, whether through direct action or as part of a group. His close involvement in Voldemort’s inner circle, and the trust Voldemort placed in him—such as revealing the prophecy that targeted the Potters—suggests that Snape had proven himself through acts of violence, possibly including murder. He was indirectly responsible for the Potters' deaths, having informed Voldemort about the prophecy in the first place. As a spy, Snape would have witnessed, overheard, or participated in many acts that resulted in casualties. It’s hard to imagine anyone rising to such a high rank within Voldemort’s ranks without engaging in the same brutal actions as the other Death Eaters, including acts like torture, which often led to death.

I believe Snape’s soul was already scarred by his past, even if some of the deaths he was connected to were indirect or in self-defense. I think he did regret a lot of what he did, and that’s part of the reason he’s so bitter and nasty to everyone. He has always, always lashed out when he’s hurt. He turned all that guilt into a hatred and bitterness over any happiness because he’s literally never been happy. But the guilt rages on, and I’m positive he tried his hardest to make up for it by being loyal to Dumbledore…even though he could never let his hatred for the marauders (aka James Potter) and anything associated with them go…thereby making him particularly nasty to Harry.

BUT I DIGRESS. The murder of Albus Dumbledore was different for Snape—a premeditated act that was both personal and emotionally charged. Killing someone he knew well, who had trusted him, would likely have a much deeper impact on his conscience than killing a stranger in the chaos of war. The betrayal involved in taking Dumbledore’s life, with whom he had a bond, would have weighed heavily on his soul, creating far more guilt and inner turmoil than the detached violence of war ever could. The emotional gravity of killing a trusted figure would have corroded his soul much more.

ALSOOOO, I believe Snape deeply regretted revealing the prophecy to Voldemort, though his remorse was not exactly produced from noble intentions. Lmaooo His motives were entirely selfish. Snape’s request to save Lily was not out of a sense of justice or compassion, but purely because of his own unrequited love. Lily, of course, would never have stepped aside to save herself at the expense of her son. She died protecting Harry, and Snape had to live with the bitter truth that she sacrificed her life for a child she had with James Potter—the very man Snape had despised for years. This awareness must have tormented him deeply, a burden he carried to his last breath. She always, always chose James.

Snape’s inner conflict is heightened by the contrast between his feelings for the Potters. He spent a lifetime harboring hatred for James Potter while remaining hopelessly in love with Lily Evans. This dichotomy—his love for one and hatred for the other—became even more fateful driven as their union produced Harry, the child Snape would be forced to protect for Dumbledore as a spy for the rest of his life. The irony of this situation is not lost on me as a reader. Snape’s love for Lily bound him to a lifelong duty to guard her son, yet he had to constantly confront the fact that this child was also James Potter’s son. His role as Harry’s protector was not just a reflection of his loyalty to Dumbledore, but a complex penance for his past mistakes, an attempt to honor Lily’s memory while wrestling with the bitter resentment he felt toward Harry’s father.

[annanaoana]

I just found out that the Harry Potter fandom and the Percy Jackson fandom fight over who is the best????? And do some Percy Jackson fans actually hate Harry Potter????

How come people aren't obsessed-fans-who-donate-their-whole-life-time-to-any-good-story? This doesn't make any sense to me because I have space in my brain for every possible fandom, you can talk to me about the hunger games, percy jackson, harry potter, maze runner, even divergent or a court of thorns and roses, kpop, etc.

My first thought would be "how long would it take for Harry and Percy to fall in love? Would it be enemies to lovers or friends to lovers?" like any normal person.

Whenever I think about Percy and Harry I wonder if there is any good fanfic about these two worlds colliding (I accept recommendations). And I haven't even begun to include the Marauders in that equation.

[lady-moonflower]

hot take; A lot of characters people call Gryffindor or Slytherin are actually better suited for Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw.

That is because people will see someone ready to take action and say "oh, they're brave! Gryffindor!", or someone who is bad/evil in a way and say "damn, they must be Slytherin". But bravery or cunning isn't said character's main trait/trait driving them forward, so the sorting just doesn't feel right,

...

that's it. bye.

[enchantedpersephone]

So I came across a TikTok about a guy who made the argument, using canon references, that the Weasley family was no better or still held some of the Death Eaters' ideologies.

Now I'm thinking about all the fanfic stories I've read that portray that side of the Weasley's not accepting Hermione as a member of the family and treating her with barely composed contempt when she married Ron, clearly preferring Harry as a dearest member of the family rather then, as he was a Half-blood, which would be considered in their beliefs begin preferable than a muggle-born alone becoming so closely associated with their family.

That makes far more sense, I believe, since we're able to observe all of that begin pretty explicitly in a few of the canon dialogues—which reminds me of the particular situation with Dumbledore's character, as many people as they grew up apparently began to seriously reconsider the words and actions of the Greatest Wizard of His Time, beginning to consider him as frightening and cruelly manipulative such as the book series' villain, Voldemort, himself.

So, I'm left wondering: Were all of us mistaken in assuming that the Weasley's could be so different, so devoid from the most deeply rooted cultural values and beliefs that characterized the Purebloods (and perhaps even the Death Eaters...?), If they still were a Pureblood family, for all the means, from the start...?

Some articles and fans' personal opinions have already indicated that the author's work is full of ambiguities and morally grey characters. That even characters who should be considered only good or bad had morally ambiguous moments throughout books that were presumed to be children's literature.

Does this however now imply that the very warm and inviting Weasley family is also included in this grey zone of the series?