I tried reading them as a kid and thought they were shit then. I realise now the biggest problems I had with it were the total absence of brick jokes (or whatever the literary equivalent is), the utter refusal to engage in foreshadowing, and the lack of character development.
Harry Potter was the best person but everyone else was a dick. “Gosh I wish something fun would happen” said Harry. Then Magic Headteacher turned up and it turns out that Harry is famous and rich and amazing! “Come and learn to be wizard and a celebrity” said Haggis, “you are amazing and have no choice”. And he did. And his stepbrother was fat. Then Harry learned to play Quitit. Albino McVillain said “I’ve been playing my who life. You’ll never be as good as me”. And Albino was correct, Harry could only win if he was given a broomstick called a Plonko 9000. Then, Harry got a mystery package. It was a Plonko 9000 and he won. “I am a wizard!” whispered Harry, “but I will still share my chocolates because he is a good person”. And he was. “Special people are born special and that’s why they’re special,” said everyone.
Which is honestly pretty standard for the real world. Limited social circles and hot times blended well for millennia, why not continue the tradition at this point if both parties are willing? That’s probably the most accurate character portrayal rowling ever made.
My general complaint is that there really isn’t any nuance to any of the characters in the books. If you’re thinking of complexity, you’re probably thinking about the performances created by various excellent actors in the movies.
Also, none of the twists are executed well, as they are either deus ex rectum or they are telegraphed to the point where you don’t even realize they were supposed to be twists.
There’s no internal consistency within or between books. Macguffins come and go to serve the story, and every story is just repackaged public domain mythology.
Actually, the fan theory that all of it is the delusion of a mistreated orphan boy does tie several things together. The entire arc reads like the fantasies of a sad, lonely kid playing with a stick in his room by himself.
I count the lack of brick jokes and foreshadowing as a plus in any book. Also, it is a series of young adult books, you can’t read too much into it. Rowling may be a shit person, but the books are the books.
I tried reading them as a kid and thought they were shit then. I realise now the biggest problems I had with it were the total absence of brick jokes (or whatever the literary equivalent is), the utter refusal to engage in foreshadowing, and the lack of character development.
Then he banged his best friend’s sister.
Which is honestly pretty standard for the real world. Limited social circles and hot times blended well for millennia, why not continue the tradition at this point if both parties are willing? That’s probably the most accurate character portrayal rowling ever made.
Hands down the best summary of the books
My general complaint is that there really isn’t any nuance to any of the characters in the books. If you’re thinking of complexity, you’re probably thinking about the performances created by various excellent actors in the movies.
Also, none of the twists are executed well, as they are either deus ex rectum or they are telegraphed to the point where you don’t even realize they were supposed to be twists.
There’s no internal consistency within or between books. Macguffins come and go to serve the story, and every story is just repackaged public domain mythology.
Actually, the fan theory that all of it is the delusion of a mistreated orphan boy does tie several things together. The entire arc reads like the fantasies of a sad, lonely kid playing with a stick in his room by himself.
I count the lack of brick jokes and foreshadowing as a plus in any book. Also, it is a series of young adult books, you can’t read too much into it. Rowling may be a shit person, but the books are the books.
Huh, now I know what to call that kind of joke. My DnD group love them.