J.K. Rowling needs to stop messing with Harry Potter - A general STFU J.K. Rowling MegaThread <3

Fandom Trash

Will dance for candy corns
kiwifarms.net
It really hilarious how many are going to try to pretend that the books were written out of thin air or -lord almightly- by Hatsume Miku.

Its the equivalent of scribbling in your own little notes inside a textbook: no matter what you do, the fact is that J.K will always be the one who wrote the book and will be rightfully remembered as such for a very long time.

I do notice that many fans who like Harry Potter might be mixing fanon with canon. There are certainly many fanfiction that put the books to shame but they are not canon, no matter how much fans want to believe or wish for.
 

Kari Kamiya

"I beat her up, so I gave her a cuck-cup."
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I do notice that many fans who like Harry Potter might be mixing fanon with canon. There are certainly many fanfiction that put the books to shame but they are not canon, no matter how much fans want to believe or wish for.

Headcanons I think have taken over the HP fandom for sure, I don't think even the wikis can keep them out of the entries. It's happened long and often enough that "Draco in Leather Pants" and "Ron the Death Eater" became fandom terms for a reason. They could've added more since then (Snape I don't think has anything named after him despite how much the fangirls have warped his character over the years), but I think out of every property Millennials have latched on to, Harry Potter is the biggest, densest pit of fan theories, headcanons, and fandom wars out there that multiple worlds exist down there at once. It's almost its own living entity at this point that it could become an honorary/adopted Lovecraftian deity.
 

Fandom Trash

Will dance for candy corns
kiwifarms.net
Yep. Its why there are fans who absolutely hate Ron and his family, or think Draco is a misunderstood boy who didn't really mean any of the muggleshit he said despite there are concrete evidences of him being particularly nasty to Hermione for just being a muggle.

I get it, Harry Potter does seem fascinating on paper; a place where you can be someone different and do amazing, magical things. But in reality, it actually sucks. If you ignore all the hidden nasty stuff that lurks just beneath the surface.

But tell that to the average Harry Potter fan won't get you much of anything. Many would, honestly, delude themselves into thinking its the perfect place to be.
 

HonestJohn2376

kiwifarms.net
That's loosely the plot of the recent movies (which are beautifully made, but the plot is nonexistent). Remember these people have the power to show up next to Hitler and murder him, yet they chose to stay behind closed doors. They only acted when Grindelwald was trying to use the war to prove Muggles need to be ruled over. So, even though Grindelwald's intentions were bad, he used his magic to show wizards that a devastating war was coming (which convinced many) and the Ministry of Magic was like "no, fuck them, let them die."

Keep in mind Rowling has confirmed that Jewish wizards exist. And it's even funnier in context when Newt was acting very smug about how British wizards are more open minded than Americans in the first movie.

Are you saying the Fantastic Beasts series is a deconstruction of everything Harry Potter stood for? Damn, I want to watch the movies again.

Also, it proves Jordan Peterson's point he made in a talk about how nazis weren't people who one day woke up evil, they were normal people who thought they were doing good, which is the case of Queenie. I think she did care about muggles dying and killing each other and actually believed Grindelwald would stop that and, of course, in this new world, she'd be free to marry the guy she wanted. Which is not different from how people joined ANTIFA and are now smashing statues and beating old ladies because "people have the right to marry each other, bigot!".

As liberal and progressive as Rowling can be, she has some moments when she makes good points about human nature. Queenie's plot is just a more kid-approached version of "some nazis were fooled into this mess". Considering we aren't seen any "JKR was a nazi-apologist all along" takes, I guess their followers haven't understood this part.

Most historians (who tend to be left-leaning IIRC) agree with Peterson about Germans becoming Nazis over decades of war, humiliation, and financial ruin. Anyone can become a depraved lunatic capable of any evil if the right conditions are met.

Too bad Rowling didn't go that deep with the Deatheaters in the Harry Potter books. Dumbledore told Harry, in essence, the people who joined Voldemort were already evil in some way to begin with. Voldemort never had a villain arc because he was always a psychopath, which I found boring. Even Hitler had a villain arc before he became Chancellor.
 

Cr1ms0n_&_C10v3r

#IStandWithIcasaracht
kiwifarms.net
I think it's established by now that JK did not fully consider the ramifications of having a secret wizarding world exist alongside/within the regular human world. In her defense, I think that she had most of her ideas fleshed out by the writing of the first book. It was and is targeted towards children despite the large number of adults still fervently stanning the franchise, and I do not think she thought that writing a fully convincing lore (taking into consideration things like WW2 included) was a priority. Additionally I doubt she foresaw the success her books would be.

That being said, worldbuilding is no less important just because you are writing for children, and I think she knows that. It has been established the whole HP verse takes place in our world, and I think the retconning is a desire to make the whole thing more interesting and "gritty" for a maturing audience, as well as make it seem more important than it really was meant to be pre-success.

In summary, lower your standards, it's a story about wizards for kids. The HP verse wasn't supposed to be the gritty, dark, all-encompassing thing it is today, beyond Voldemort and the death eaters. It's a combination of extreme unforeseen popularity and an overly enthusiastic author, I think.
 
Last edited:

Sasori of the Red Sand

I've got no strings to hold me down
kiwifarms.net
If J.K. Rowling wanted more diversity in her books than she should've just done it instead of being a pussy. If she wanted Dumbledore to be gay for Grindelwald than she should've done so in the books. She wouldn't have had to make it obvious either. In the ASOIAF book series, you could figure out that Loras and Renly loved each other despite the fact that it wasn't blatant. If she wanted Hermione to be black than she should've made Hermione black. Rowling could have also had Harry end up with Cho Chang instead of having Harry marry Ginny. Asian people aren't represented a lot in Western media, and interracial couples aren't that common either.
 

Cr1ms0n_&_C10v3r

#IStandWithIcasaracht
kiwifarms.net
I know I'm late bringing this up, but seeing these sorts of articles while scrolling through the news cracks me up.
20200622_051408.jpg
 

Doctor Placebo

Somebody asked for brains?
kiwifarms.net
That's part of the reason why I think HP is so appealing to a certain group of Millennials. It appeals to a deep-seated narcissism that many Millennials have, and the HP books present a world where these snowflakes special people have access to the powers that they obviously deserve to have. The Xenophobia comes right with the territory. See, SJW's think that they are special because they are obviously more "woke" than you are, and should thus be put in charge on the basis of their birth (race, "gender," etc.).

In my personal experience in the American South, Harry Potter seems to appeal to a certain type of girl who has a difficult time fitting in, but who then translates that into a smug sense of superiority over her rube peers. They think they are Hermoines in a land of trailer-trash Muggles. Case in point, one of my FB "friends" whom I met at a conference is an insufferable SJW, and has been on a quest to get back at her culture that apparently didn't appreciate her and kept her down as a woman. She's the textbook definition of an FB activist, sharing and posting every BLM and Sanders thing she runs across her feed. She did have a rare "original" post, as shown here. I guarantee you, it is 100% unironic.
View attachment 1389572
Then I guess I would be angry too if my God around whom I built most of my worldview betrayed me like that too.
A lot of the big YA series and trends that followed share this feature. Hunger Games, Divergent, etc. They all center around some teenager who's alienated from the world and special in some way becoming a big savior who changes everything.

Now you might be tempted to say that's every fantasy book, but I say bullshit.

Let's look at LoTR for example. A lot of people call Frodo the main character, but really it's an ensemble cast, with lots of very important players. Furthermore, even if we consider Frodo the main character, he's not really a standard chosen one. He's thirty years old when the story begins, and aside from a hidden strength of character that surprises everyone, he's an ordinary person from an extremely boring and ordinary group of people. That part is actually stressed in the books, and the movies. Other characters like Aragorn, Sam, and even Eowyn, who isn't even a main character, get the coolest action scenes.

Or we can look at another older fantasy story, The Chronicles of Narnia. This is closer to Harry Potter syndrome, but again, it's more of an ensemble cast. Each book has at least two leads, usually more. They're also usually fighting to preserve the world, not change it, which is also true of Lord of the Rings.

Basically, there's a fairly recent trend in YA literature that appeals to a certain type of egotist, reinforces this idea of the world revolving around them, and encourages them to become activists with the promise that they'll get to reshape the world in their image.
 

Alto

To the stars!
kiwifarms.net
Harry Potter really did breed a generation of insufferable Chosen One narratives that I can't stand in fiction. The best kinds of protagonists are underdogs, weaklings that push themselves to be stronger, or humble everymen that don't want to be the leader but are forced into that position. That's way more compelling than you finding out you were super speshul all along.

Harry is a really boring protagonist because he's a blank slate with moments of arrogance. Even Katniss had something of a personality in that she came across as cynical and grumpy in the books. I have a really hard time coming up with what Harry's key characteristics were other than he was special.
 

Effluvium

Pirate sites are your friend.
kiwifarms.net
They are literally engaging in; more or less, the kind of misogynistic behavior they accuse right wingers of. Whether or not Rowling gives in, it'll only paint her as even more of a spineless sellout than she already is. The people who want her to "repent" don't want it, but for her to be humiliated and prostrated.
To be fair, given the behaviour of SJWs and TRAs and their ability to 'cancel' people, anyone associated with Harry Potter has had to say something or they'll be accused of being responsible for the deaths of millions of trans kids who will all be murdered or commit suicide. In particular, once Radcliffe and Watson spoke out, Grint had to. If I was in the Harry Potter films I'd be on the phone to my manager now, "Yeah, yeah, trans women are women, trans men are men, yada yada, just release a statement so that I can get work again, okay?"
I think a part of this entire travesty is that all three have more or less been molded by Harry Potter.

Watson is too far gone, Radcliffe was always a closet faggot, and Grint most likely just wants to be left alone.

That being the case, whether they like it or not, Rowling was the one that made it all possible for them. They were nobodies who could have landed any other roles, end up as damaged child actors with prolapsed sphincters, or be found after a bad overdose days later.

Unfortunately, I find any of those alternatives palatable to what's become of them now. Insufferable wealthy elites who think they know better.
And it's even funnier in context when Newt was acting very smug about how British wizards are more open minded than Americans in the first movie.
This is what I find insufferable about Europeans, especially Englishmen. They keep fashioning themselves as being very progressive, but their general society is still largely conservative and bigoted, but wildly backwards in that they disparage those that don't openly debase themselves into being more politically correct. Basically, those who are the most vocal about it are just offering lip service with an entire boneyard in their closets, while the ones who don't give two shits and not exposing their kids to pedophiles in a strip club are arguably more progressive than they are because they actually have a modicum of logic that real life isn't bitch made.
Too bad Rowling didn't go that deep with the Deatheaters in the Harry Potter books. Dumbledore told Harry, in essence, the people who joined Voldemort were already evil in some way to begin with. Voldemort never had a villain arc because he was always a psychopath, which I found boring. Even Hitler had a villain arc before he became Chancellor.
How fucking dare you, nazi apologist scum. To Twitter jail with you. Also, I'm calling your job.
 
Last edited:

Doctor Placebo

Somebody asked for brains?
kiwifarms.net
Harry Potter really did breed a generation of insufferable Chosen One narratives that I can't stand in fiction. The best kinds of protagonists are underdogs, weaklings that push themselves to be stronger, or humble everymen that don't want to be the leader but are forced into that position. That's way more compelling than you finding out you were super speshul all along.

Harry is a really boring protagonist because he's a blank slate with moments of arrogance. Even Katniss had something of a personality in that she came across as cynical and grumpy in the books. I have a really hard time coming up with what Harry's key characteristics were other than he was special.
Harry did have being raised by an abusive family in defacto poverty in the underdog category. He had this thing going on in the earliest books where he's someone who has nothing only to suddenly be handed everything and he's uncomfortable with it, but in the later books that's dropped entirely in favor of a lot of teen angst that meanders in multiple directions but never goes anywhere.
 

Marco Fucko

I fantasized about this back in Chicago
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Harry Potter really did breed a generation of insufferable Chosen One narratives that I can't stand in fiction. The best kinds of protagonists are underdogs, weaklings that push themselves to be stronger, or humble everymen that don't want to be the leader but are forced into that position. That's way more compelling than you finding out you were super speshul all along.

Harry is a really boring protagonist because he's a blank slate with moments of arrogance. Even Katniss had something of a personality in that she came across as cynical and grumpy in the books. I have a really hard time coming up with what Harry's key characteristics were other than he was special.

Honestly I kind of wish Rowling did more with the House system, and one way to do that would have been putting Harry in Slytherin. One thing that always stuck out to me about Harry's personality is he had this dark underline, since he was raised in an abusive household and I recall the books mentioning his magic would trigger whenever he had particularly dark thoughts. There's the scene where he disappears the glass and Dudley falls into the snake habitat, and IIRC he accidentally apparated himself to a roof to avoid bullies.

So you've got this kid who's being bullied and all of a sudden he has an escape from that and as the sorting hat says "wants to prove himself". You can give him a lot of depth from that. Make him an academic tryhard and that's how he gets in with Hermione, make him really sporty and that's how he gets in with the Weasleys, and make him not having any classist pretensions a source of conflict since a solid chunk of Slytherin house is upper middle class. Have Harry be the aspirant side of ambition and cunning, as opposed to "normal" Slytherins who represent the upper crust's hold on wealth and power and their grooming their kids to inherit it.
 

Effluvium

Pirate sites are your friend.
kiwifarms.net
Honestly I kind of wish Rowling did more with the House system, and one way to do that would have been putting Harry in Slytherin. One thing that always stuck out to me about Harry's personality is he had this dark underline, since he was raised in an abusive household and I recall the books mentioning his magic would trigger whenever he had particularly dark thoughts. There's the scene where he disappears the glass and Dudley falls into the snake habitat, and IIRC he accidentally apparated himself to a roof to avoid bullies.

So you've got this kid who's being bullied and all of a sudden he has an escape from that and as the sorting hat says "wants to prove himself". You can give him a lot of depth from that. Make him an academic tryhard and that's how he gets in with Hermione, make him really sporty and that's how he gets in with the Weasleys, and make him not having any classist pretensions a source of conflict since a solid chunk of Slytherin house is upper middle class. Have Harry be the aspirant side of ambition and cunning, as opposed to "normal" Slytherins who represent the upper crust's hold on wealth and power and their grooming their kids to inherit it.
Have you read or seen any good Slytherin Harry Potter fanfiction?
 

Effluvium

Pirate sites are your friend.
kiwifarms.net
Millions of Harry Potter fans across all the usa and the world are now asking themselves, is JK Rowling actually a bigot? Is she really a trans-phobic person? I looked at her twitter. And I learned, sadly, she is indeed Transphobic. Jk Rolwing said that men are men, and women are women. And she said Transexual women, are actually not women. Deeply problematic language she is using. Why now? Why is the author of Harry Potter suddenly now attacking Transexuals? What is her goal here? If her goal was to upset lots of Harry Potter fans then she is accomplishing that. Some Harry Potter fans are but Most Harry Potter fans are not transexual themselves. However about 90% roughly of all Harry Potter fans do indeed support Transexual rights so its a little shocking and frankly rather odd that JK Rowling is doing this. Especially right now during this political landscape.
Crazy theory that doesn't sound crazy in hindsight, but I think apart from the fuck you money Rowling has going for herself, she's probably sick of this cult she's inadvertently started.

Either she douses the long burning bonfire that is her Frankenstein creation into soggy ash, opening herself up to an entirely untapped market of people she politically disagrees with on her new and upcoming books, shaving off attention from her contribution to the New Testament with Harry "JC" Potter, or, she kills her brand and starts over from scratch.

It's actually kind of startling that the people she's burned bridges with, and vice versa, are this quick to effectively erase her presence and influence once she stepped out of line.
 

Based_Papa_John

Gabriel is blowing his trumpet. Can you hear it?
kiwifarms.net
Harry is a really boring protagonist because he's a blank slate with moments of arrogance. Even Katniss had something of a personality in that she came across as cynical and grumpy in the books. I have a really hard time coming up with what Harry's key characteristics were other than he was special.
Heck, Ron had more personality. But I suppose thats the beauty of the book: you can project yourself into Harry Potter.
Harry did have being raised by an abusive family in defacto poverty in the underdog category. He had this thing going on in the earliest books where he's someone who has nothing only to suddenly be handed everything and he's uncomfortable with it, but in the later books that's dropped entirely in favor of a lot of teen angst that meanders in multiple directions but never goes anywhere.
Which also feeds into the Daddy issues that a lot of these guys suffer from.
Crazy theory that doesn't sound crazy in hindsight, but I think apart from the fuck you money Rowling has going for herself, she's probably sick of this cult she's inadvertently started.

Either she douses the long burning bonfire that is her Frankenstein creation into soggy ash, opening herself up to an entirely untapped market of people she politically disagrees with on her new and upcoming books, shaving off attention from her contribution to the New Testament with Harry "JC" Potter, or, she kills her brand and starts over from scratch.

It's actually kind of startling that the people she's burned bridges with, and vice versa, are this quick to effectively erase her presence and influence once she stepped out of line.
If this is the actual case, hella mad respect. I'm sure all the "Dumbledore was gay" Word of God pronouncements were likely thrilling when she got positive feedback, but she likely understood what kind of monster she created. The best way we can evaluate her books anyway for all of this generation to be dead so that the next generation can have a proper evaluation without the baggage given to it by some Millennials.
 

Similar threads

Tags
None