|
Alright, I'm trying to write this post in a way that won't come across as unnecessarily combative, just try to understand where I'm coming from. I tried to bring this up with my friends who've read the series but they were dismissive or simply didn't care, hopefully I find something here. Full disclosure, I've only just started the third book. I was 7 when the book was published in the US and basically the whole world was centered around them for the next decade. I vaguely recall reading the first one when my sister finished it probably sometime around 2000 but stopped very early in the story, before he even found out he was a wizard. Being 8 years old at the time I lacked the critical insight to discover why I put down what everyone else not only couldn't put down, but couldn't put down for 6 more books and 8 movies. I finally decided to sit down and read them (well, listen to them - audiobooks are my bread and butter thanks to a lot of quiet time at work and my commute) after being invited to give a talk at my alma mater's annual Harry Potter Conference (if you live in the Philly area, look it up and go to it, it's a surprisingly robust event given the size of the school and the specificity of the event) (ps this post is probably going to be the seed of my paper). Anyway I've been devouring the series, putting my normal podcasting schedule out of whack as I've finished the first two books in one week but I've noticed that going through the first few chapters has been a chore, taking me the better part of two days of going through one to five minute chunks before moving on to something else. There was no mystery as to why it was so hard, but it did finally answer the reason why I threw the book down as a kid and started reading Zelazny and Robert E Howard before I got out of elementary school. It's the Dursley's. Everything about them is so problematic and vividly triggering to my childhood of abuse that I end up in tears just trying to get through it. I don't understand how a children's book can have vivid and graphic destriptions of child abuse to open up each book. Granted I haven't been in the fandom but simply by existing in the culture I've heard more than my share of Potter discussion and I've never once heard anyone talk about how terrible and disgusting the portrayal of his adoptive family is. And the way Rowling describes it is so unfortunately vivid because the only times I've heard someone fictionalize abuse that well is from victims of it themselves, so my mind doesn't focus on the story, but of my own past and the theoretical past of Rowling's. But worst of all is how unnecessary it is, the place of the Dursley's in the story makes no sense if they’re supposed to make me hate muggles then why is the entire plot of the second book about how much Harry doesn’t hate muggles? If it’s supposed to be about how great it is that the wizarding world actually cares for Harry why do they send him back year after year to suffer at the hands of uncaring, evil people? If it’s supposed to emphasize how wonderful and magical Hogwarts is and how boring and bland the ordinary world is, why the gently caress would you even do that, that’s the most terrible, egregious way of showing the fact that real life is boring I’ve ever heard of. I, hand to God, can't make sense of it and need to discuss it with someone. Also the Silmarillion is badass if you like world building with no characterization.
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
Mercury Hat posted:First off, what you went through is horrible and I'm sorry. Thanks for the sympathy, and sorry for taking a while to get back here. I guess I'd have to side with the Roald Dahl theory, it fits very well with the series' thematic references to other children's lit. It makes sense given that Harry seems to brush off frighteningly awful abuse as though it was simply boring or something. From what I read of everyone's responses there will be more revealed about the older wizard's motivations so it may actually get worse. But if his treatment gets better, even slightly, I suppose I can handle it. I still feel it's wildly inappropriate and disrespectful and has opened up a lens that makes me view an otherwise lighthearted children's coming of age adventure series in a dark light. Otto Von Jizzmark posted:I don't know Harry was fed and clothed and given a roof over his head. They even took him to the zoo when he talked to the snake. They weren't beating the hell out of him or Mr duesley molesting him. Maybe they just didn't like him because he wasn't their kid and was a burden to a family that didn't have a lot to begin with. You are a shithead and shouldn't talk about things you don't know or care enough to learn about.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
Otto Von Jizzmark posted:What else do I need to learn about Harry potter outside of reading the books and watching the movies? Do you have a source explaining all Harry's abuse outside of these? Secret details about the extent of the physical and possible sexual abuse thrust upon the boy who lived. I'm glad the only kind of abuse in the world is physical and sexual, great, loving cool. When you have kids, try locking them in a closet for 99% of the day for the entirety of summer and see how they turn out. Or maybe bring in the extended family and spend an entire week ridiculing and teasing a 13 year old I'm sure they'd just pass it off as good fun. But no you're right, you got to hit kids for it to "count" or touch them, that's the only way to gently caress with people. I knew I shouldn't of brought this poo poo up, there's always terrible assholes like you running around.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 10:59
|
|
|
Otto Von Jizzmark posted:99% of the summer what books are you reading I don't remember that. Harry turned put just fine he managed to have a stable relationship with his high school sweetheart long enough to get married and have kids. In fact throughout the books he seemed quite well adjusted he had friends several teachers and peers thought highly of him despite having several life threatening encounters. It's safe to say Harry potter turned put ok perhaps for the better by the humbling experience of being raised by the dursleys. Maybe his parents would have spoiled him rotten what with all that gold and he would have been just like Malfoy. Yes he turns out ok and it's literally the most unrealistic thing that happens in a series where a tree eats a flying broom. If y'all want I can detail how similar my rearing was with Harry's and then regale you with tales of how I was incapable of talking with strangers until I was 14. And thanks for getting super pedantic about how much time he spends in a closet. Guess how much loving time a 10 year old should spend locked in a closet because it's way less than you loving thing you giant mother loving piece of human garbage how are you not loving banned for the poo poo you're pulling here because that's loving twice now you've made break down crying you pile of poo poo you should be ashamed of yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
Christ almighty there are some lovely goons. If you really think I was crying over Harry Potter, then I really don't expect you to understand anything else I've said. Although I really dig your implication that I haven't gone on to live my life to the best of my ability because I made on post about it on a lovely internet forum. No, you're right, I haven't moved on from in the slightest and I've never left my room ever once. e: vvv that's really all I was saying, adding in context from my own life, and the fact that the scenes at Privet Drive are almost entirely unnecessary to the story. MatildaTheHun fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Nov 1, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Hey I just finished the series. Dumbledore's kinda loving crazy. Snape is so hardcore in the friendzone it actually doesn't make sense, unless he canonically has a severe mental disorder. Dude decides to switch allegiances in a war because of a crush he had on some girl when he was twelve. And if we're talking fanfics we're not embarrassing enough to write, a female Harry who looks like her mother but has her father's eyes, and is a total raging rear end in a top hat just like James was when he was a kid. And Snape dotes on her and treats her like God's gift to the wizarding world, praising her always mediocre potions, and cheering even as she repeatedly crushes his house in quidditch. Like a gross, unlikeable character. And Harry names his kid after him! No love for Hagrid.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
thexerox123 posted:Sorry to steer the conversation back into potentially depressing/controversial territory, but I'm curious about your ultimate thoughts on the Dursleys and that whole situation, now that you've finished the series. My thoughts really haven't changed, like you guys said the Dursley's basically disappear after a while, and in the 7th book they literally disappear. (Why in the world the epilogue didn't have Dudley in it at all I don't know. That seems like a really obvious thing to put in. Maybe he has a magical child or something? gently caress you Rowling.) The fact that their presence in the former half of the series is completely unnecessary is unchanged when I get to the end. I guess their inclusion as a Roald Dahl-esque evil parents thing (which, incidentally is a huge problem for me in any case, the beginning of James and the Giant Peach is just as god awful as the Dursley's) is justifiable. Or maybe a way to make the whole mundane = boring, magical = uhh... magical thing really obvious, but then again that should be readily apparent once you get whisked away by a half-giant driving a flying motorcycle to a hidden road in London where you buy a magic wand. Also, Harry's recovery from what is objectively a frightening amount of child abuse is possibly the most unbelievable part of a series where teleportation via fire is the most popular form of transportation.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
I went out of my way to mention that in the very post you quoted, so thanks buddy. It still doesn't stop reading the books being really lovely for anyone who's actually experienced child abuse.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
I knew I shouldn't have replied to that quote. I'm sorry I didn't use the perfect legalese to avoid offending anyone. Calling someone a chode for going into detail about a very personal matter at the behest of some random rear end in a top hat on the internet is pretty loving god awful. This is the second time I got burned really loving hard just trying to talk about the most important experience I had in reading Harry Potter. I'm loving sorry. And the best part, you won't get even get on a slap on the wrist like that other guy who called me a baby for not enjoying being reminded of abuse. gently caress this whole thread to be honest, sorry I even mentioned it, and sorry for replying to that guy's question.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Snape was a psychopath who got friendzoned by the only person who cared about him and was just as evil as each one of the other literal Nazi wizards that he ran with for most of his life. He was so obsessed with this one girl he switched allegiances just because she was harmed, but didn't care about the murder of an infant. "Yeah sure go ahead and kill a 4 month old but oh man you killed that mudblood girl that lived down the street from me that I knew back in high school oh poo poo you've gone too far!"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
People hated the pope because he was forced into the Hitler Youth. Genuinely wanting to replace the British government with a wizard-run dictatorship in a violent coup should totally invalidate the fact that he was a cute kid. Normally I hate Nazi analogies because they are so cheap, but the Death Eaters wanted to kill or enslave every non-pureblood in the world, they actually wanted to do something with a Hitlerian level of violence, hatred, and scale. Snape wasn't a hero, he was the right hand man of the greatest evil to ever exist in the wizarding world.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Yes, Dumbledore conspired to make a child fight said greatest evil of all time, and was therefore also a completely insane jackass. The only good adult in the whole series was Narcissa.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Snape is Rowling's Gollum-equivalent. He's a bad person and a jackass but he exists for the narrative purpose of demonstrating that even horrible, evil people can sometimes do good things and you shouldn't just write them off completely. But the thing is I can write him off completely because the one good thing he did was motivated by a creepy, obsessive, almost stalker-esque attachment to a person he would otherwise hate out of hand due to her heritage (remember that mudblood is a slur that people reacted to with extreme offense, and that Snape worked with and was allied with a revolutionary movement that wanted to have Lily Evan's killed due to her parentage). And this so called good act is tainted because he betrayed the only people he could count as allies because of this of this legitimately insane obsession. This is a dude who hated the son of a guy who was a jerk to him when he was 12 so much that he actively inhibited his academic progress. Imagine that for a loving second, if you met a human being who had a bully in middle school and harbored an intense hatred of a child because he was his son. That's not a bad person who did a good thing that's insane. Sure he didn't kill Harry himself, but if that's the rubric we're using to be a good person now then I guess I am Jesus incarnate.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
JohnSherman posted:The Dursleys were a cartoon and if someone is honestly knocking Rowling for not throwing Petunia through the Veil to appease their inability to recognize absurdity then I don't know how that person has ever read a book. For a cartoon they sure are a starkly realistic portrayal of child emotional and physical abuse. Really, people in this thread have no empathy. :I
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
Of course he loves Lily, that's pretty hammered in through the course of the last few books. His patronus changed for her, the vanguard of his soul changed formed because he had that much love for one person. He's still a terrible person that no one should idolize.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 16:29
|
|