• nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    At the peak of Harry Potter craze, this might have worked well. Sounds like an older millennial

    • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not blatantly, but there are signs of it even in the first book; and as the books go on, you can see almost in real time her political views shift from criticizing the system to defending it as she started becoming wealthy and benefiting from the system.

      I highly recommend watching Shaun’s 2 hour video on the subject, as it goes into great detail on the subject and makes for perfect podcast material.

      Some highlights include:

      • Obesity as a moral failing - want to make a character seem bad? Just make them fat!
      • Masculine features as a negative trait for women (sound familiar?) - want to make a teenage girl bad (and ugly) but don’t want to make her fat? Just talk over and over about her “mannish hands” and sharp jawline.
      • Token minority characters that are often stereotypes or border on racism - the black kid is named Shacklebolt, the Asian girl is named two single syllable last names (might as well have called her Ching Chong), the 12 year old Irish kid is obsessed with turning drinks into whiskey and blowing stuff up, etc.
      • The defense of the slavery of house elves using the exact same arguments that slave owners used before the Civil War in the US mentioned by somebody else, with a bonus criticism of Hermione as a girl with blue hair and pronouns for questioning and trying to change the system.
      • There are no good or bad actions, only good or bad people. It’s okay for the right people to use the torture spell, because they’re the “good guys.”
      • And a resolution that basically resolves nothing. Harry doesn’t kill Voldemort, he kills himself due to a magic technicality, and Harry goes on to become a magic cop to ensure the flawed system that the early books criticized doesn’t change.
    • Maven (famous)@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      There’s an entire section of the books about how slavery is okay because the slaves like it actually

      • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        I feel like that was more so her self insert, hermoinie, can be “on the right side of history”

        This is my little headcannon theory and not a hill I even wanna fight on, so if there are blatant holes I’m interested I’m hearing but also keep in mind this is just something I “believe” because it amuses me.

        • Maven (famous)@lemmy.zipOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          3 months ago

          Hermione is basically ridiculed and becomes a stereotypical “irrational activist” character during it. If she was trying to make Hermione the one in the right here she did everything she could to make her look like she was in the wrong.

          • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah I know and agree. It is her self insert or who she “identified” with the most, so I hand wave the plot holes of my theory away with the same literary finesse Jk Rowling has exhibited in recent decade or two. Like I said, not a hill I’m even willing to fight on lol.

            The reality is she is an awful racist person, but I like to make both things true in my headcannon. Idk doesn’t everyone have loose silly things they kinda choose to believe in for fun?

    • OsaErisXero@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      She does not meet the conditions for Death of the Author to apply, unless you know something I don’t

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 months ago

        It just means the author’s intent is ignored in interpreting the work. Like if you, the reader, decide “the sky is gray” is a reflection of the main character’s inner turmoil, that’s what it means. Even if the author was just foreshadowing some rain, your interpretation is correct because death of the author means the reader’s interpretation is the correct one. It’s kind of silly, but it also lets people find new meaning in art and I think that’s neat.

        People use it as “enjoy the art but fuck the artist” but I don’t think that’s entirely accurate, unless they’re choosing to interpret certain parts of the books as not coming from a problematic place.

        • Maven (famous)@lemmy.zipOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          From what I’ve noticed online, (yes I know this is anecdotal) people tend to throw out the death of the author as a way of saying “I know this person is shitty and paying for this is actively funding hate but also I am going to keep giving them money anyway”.

          Like, yes… You should be allowed to enjoy the things that you enjoy… But also… Stop funding the death of trans people

  • lugal@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The spell was just gibberish to me and I couldn’t read it until I read the answer. Only than I would parse it. If you asked me for a spell to lift things up, I would have no idea but someone both things made it make sense. Curious how brains work.

    At least mine. JKR’s brain doesn’t seam to work anymore for good sadly