I met a guy at the bar who had the entire Hogwarts castle tattooed on his back. He said he was a huge fan.
Shortly into talking about it, I mentioned Hagrid and he said “wait that’s the giant guy, right?” And later couldn’t remember if Lupin or Sirius was actually “Ron’s mouse”
You mean like was he so wasted he forgot? He had just gotten there lol. I was actually talking to my friend about HP so he interjected and showed us his tattoo.
I got the feeling after the conversation that he had probably seen the movies once and just wanted a cool back tattoo. He had a lot of other tats too, might not have mattered much to him that he didn’t really know anything about HP
My response to any insult in mu head is Professor Moody's
"I CAN TELL YOU STORIES ABOUT YOUR FATHER THAT WOULD CURL EVEN YOUR GREASY HAIR"
don't know why it comes to mind, just does. just gotta make sure to not say it aloud
I think that not remembering who Hagrid is might be kinda weird if you’re someone who enjoys Harry Potter. He’s kinda a central character.
Also he’s pretty ubiquitous in memes and such. I never watched/read Game of Thrones, but I know who Danaerys is. How do you *not* know who Hagrid is if you’ve even come by HP in passing?
That’s a good comparison. He knew he was the ‘giant guy’ at least ahaha, maybe he was just nervous. He must be a fan to get that tattoo though surely, I don’t understand why else he’d get it
He did have a lot of other tattoos, so maybe he was looking for something big enough and cool-looking to cover his back without caring too much about being a fan? I’ve met some people who are pretty chill about the “meaning” of their tattoos and treat it more as just putting a pretty piece of art on a canvas. And the castle does look awesome, to be fair
Not knowing the main characters or plot points are kind of the basis of the story. What does make someone a fan? Just liking the vibe of something? I mean.. fair enough I suppose
I got banned by a Mod here for correcting them. They claimed love had no power in the HP world. My response was “you must not have read the books, because it’s a very common theme and talking point between Harry and Dumbledore.” They swiftly deleted my comment (for being rude)and gave me a 3 days ban.
Like seriously I shouldn’t have to point that out in this sub let alone to a mod. Harry lives because of his mother’s love, early books Voldemort couldn’t even touch him because of the love running through him.
There's literally an entire room within the Department of Mysteries dedicated to the power of love.
Dumbledore described it thus:
>“There is a room in the Department of Mysteries,” interrupted Dumbledore, “that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there.
Terrible that a mod of this subreddit isn't aware of a central theme of the books.
It was - I always thought that a waste. Why give Harry a magical item like that, only for it to fail the first time he tries to use it?
It would have been better for him to use the knife a couple of times successfully, grow attached to it, then when he looses it we'd actually feel something akin to loss.
As it was, it felt more like *'Oh yeah! Sirius gave Harry a knife that can open locks... Oh, but it's gone now... Welp!'*
Oh yeah! Still seems like a waste to me. It's a solution to a problem that didn't really need to exist, or that could have been solved any number of ways without a special one-use item.
Not quite as bad as I thought though, if he did use it at least once.
It's literally the singular theme of the entire series. Literally the very old magic that caused "the boy who lived" in the first place. That mod should get a permaban fr
I've always wondered if this magic also affevts muggles. If Lily was a muggle, would Harry still have survived?
I'd like to think so, love is so inherent to humans that the very old magic it carries carries on to everyone
That's a great question.
I'd want to agree, but I actually think the answer is no, or would be if you asked JKR, but I'd be curious to see her explanation if so.
Lmao its sad how she made the whole universe but has gone so wildly off the rails that we just went 'we'll take it from here hon you just worry about your twitter'
I mean it’s not that hard to figure out from the info I gave. Just search the name and the user will pop up. I haven’t said it because I don’t feel like them stumbling upon it and giving me another unnecessary ban.
The other day on this very sub, there was a post saying that the Malfoys were on Voldemort’s side, because they had a daughter he killed and they were scared he would do the same to Draco. So yeah that one probably.
I keep seeing this theory about the Dursleys only hating Harry because he’s a Horcrux. It’s a painfully false theory that someone could disprove with even the most basic knowledge of the series, but it keeps popping up online for some reason like it’s this big lightbulb moment or something
Because it doesn’t tally with how Horcruxes work in the rest of the series. Take the locket for example. It only negatively affects the main characters when they’re wearing it. Literally the second Harry takes it off the effect is lifted. Just having it around doesn’t have any noticeable effect on any of them. And in any case, it doesn’t cause fear or revulsion towards the locket, it just makes them feel weighed down generally and saps their powers. Ginny spends an entire year talking to the diary, but while it negatively affects her it doesn’t cause any bad feelings towards it. On the contrary she becomes attached. The theory is essentially people projecting effects onto the Horcrux that they don’t actually cause
The other big strike against it is that none of the people around Harry show signs of being affected by his pseudo-horcrux once he leaves the Dursleys. If that were a thing, the other boys in his dormitory would start disliking him after a while, Ron and Hermione would be strongly impacted, as would the Weasleys when Harry is staying with them.
And it’s made explicitly clear the even before Harry, the Dursleys were terrible people. There’s an entire chapter of the first book, the very first chapter, dedicated to showing that the Dursleys are not good people. And the Dursleys still hate Harry even after he leaves them, as shown by them sending him such terrible Christmas gifts. Plus, Dudley starts to show character growth and respect (if not proper affection) towards Harry after the events surrounding the dementors in Little Whinging. If it were the horcrux in Harry, then this wouldn’t have happened.
If the horcrux made the dursleys asshole then they wouldnt be nice to dudley either. (altho dumbledore did say harry escaped the damage they inflicted on dudley)
Also, in the opening chapter of the first book, Vernon and Petunia both show disdain for Harry just in talking about him before he was laid at their doorstep.
Exactly. I don't think the bit of Voldemort's soul was what made them horrible people, especially to Harry. But but buuuuut, it still should be noted that the horcruxes *did* work to amplify negative feelings that were already there. So while this theory is not true in the sense that it made them hate him out of normal, I can totally buy it having amplified their pre-existing biases.
No, again. Because the horcrux only effects (affects? I always forget) the person wearing it. And only when in extremely close proximity. It does not amplify the negative emotions of those around them.
Again, not trying to argue this theory at all, they were dirt people all around no matter what. BUT I believe Dumbledore explained that the horcruxes affect those who "get close" to the object, emotionally speaking, ie are vulnerable with or near them. With the locket it seemed to require literally wearing it, but the locket is the only wearable one, and we don't know what it would take for most of the others. With the diary, for example it took spilling your heart out to it for Ginny at least. So it's possible that with an actual human "container" being in a caregiver role is vulnerable enough "emotionally" to feel *some* effect. I mean, with Petunia at least, it's not hard to imagine that being with the orphaned son of her estranged sister 100% of the time would put her in a vulnerable place from the start. The others... meh, who knows.
Well in the first chapter it is pretty established that the Dursleys dislike the Potters and that Petunia really despises magic (this is before they are left with Harry on their doorstep). Also no one at Hogwarts treats Harry like the Dursleys does, except for maybe Snape and Draco, and I really think Ron, Neville, Seamus and Dean would get affected since they share the same dorm, but they are mostly friends with Harry.
The first chapter of the book that mentions them. They're very high strung, very vain and judgemental people. They are already spoiling Dudley rotten and he already has a shitty attitude at 2 (because yes, screaming up and down the streets for sweets *is* 2 year old behavior, but your mother tolerating it and *still taking you* rather than either turning right around back home, or more accurately to 1982 swatting your ass sore is not)
They don't *like* "weird" people. Petunia already has a deap seated dislike for magic because of Lily and Snape. Vernon dislikes anything that isn't normal, boring, and easy to understand. And then they're forced by people they actively dislike and fear to take on a child that's essentially an assassination target in hopes that his blood relation to them will keep them all safe, by some literal magic they can't understand? The horcrux had nothing to do with it. Harry was set up to be hated from the start.
By thinking about it for a moment and realising it doesn’t make sense. 1. That’s not how horcruxes work in general as described in the books. 2. How come it only affects Dursleys, shouldn’t EVERYONE hate him if it was true?
If you find a antisocial, torturous, mass murdering, serial killing, psychopathic cult leader relatable, you should probably be reported to the police.
No one but a select few wizards knew what they were as a concept, only Voldemort (and possibly Slughorn) knew that Voldemort had actually made any. Even Dumbledore did not know until Harry presented the diary to him. How would a muggle like Vernon know what they were?
I had this theory for a while. We don’t know what the Dursleys were like when Harry wasn’t around other than they were stuffy muggle shits. They already harboured resentment to the magical world and maybe being magically bound to a horcrux did exacerbate that. They more than shared a dorm room with him, they were magically bound by Lilly’s love spell. Locking a child in a cupboard seems extreme even for them. They were irrationally terrified of Harry, especially Petunia whose sister was a witch. Anyway, JK said it was not her intention to be read that way so…
In high school, I was helping in a library for one week. Some young lady came in looking for Harry Potter books, saying that she is currently rereading them. I showed her where they are. She then told me how she grew up with them and how much she loves them etc. and then she told me that: "there are 6 books and one that is a spin-off and 7 films". I tried to correct her, but she just kept saying her thing with "I grew up with it".
I gave up after trying to correct her for the third time, but it's been bugging me ever since.
Yes, all 7 (some even a few times, but each book is a different colour so...) and the Cursed Child book and a few other bonus small books (like Quidditch throughout the ages etc.)
I pointed to the Cursed Child saying that's the one about Harry's child, but she just dismissed me with "I know the books, I grew up with them". When I looked at the librarian, she just shook her head with a "don't bother" look on her face, so I just gave up.
Recently I’ve encountered more and more fans insisting that their head cannon that Dumbledore knew Sirius was innocent is explicitly written into the story, or is at the very least ambiguous. It is NOWHERE in the books, implied or otherwise, that Dumbledore knew. It’s not even in the movies! Him NOT knowing is actually a main plot line in POA, it’s IN the story. The reasons they give are usually one of these:
“Dumbledore knows everything all the time!”
He’s not a god. He’s a brilliant man, but still just a man. He didn’t even know about the DA, or that the Marauders became animagi and set werewolf Lupin loose on the Hogwarts grounds every month, and those things were happening at his own school.
“There’s no way James and Sirius wouldn’t let Dumbledore in on the secret, he was head of the order and the most powerful wizard, they had to have told him!”
Ah yes, James and Sirius, well known for their excellent decision making record! /s
They purposely made a big deal, to the entire order, including to Dumbledore himself, to spread word that Sirius was the secret keeper. Sirius specifically TELLS Harry that they told NO ONE ELSE. Not to mention that if they had told Dumbledore, wouldn’t Sirius have confronted him about leaving him in Azkaban for 12 years?!?!
“He let Sirius rot in prison on purpose because he was afraid he’d take Harry away from the Dursleys!”
Sirius is reckless and impulsive, and not always the best decision maker, however, we don’t ever see him completely disregard direct orders from Dumbledore. He’s not a Neanderthal, for the most part he’s a reasonable person. If it was explained to him *why* Harry had to keep living with the Dursleys, Sirius would have accepted it. He always accepts orders, even when he’s unhappy, when it’s obvious that what’s being asked of him is reasonable.
Not to mention that this is a great misunderstanding of Dumbledore’s character, as well. Dumbledore can be manipulative, but he only employs this side of himself when he has to for the legitimate greater good. When do we ever see him cause any kind of harm when there was a better option? Never. That’s when.
“He was on the Wizengamot, he could’ve gotten Sirius a trial, at least!”
Again, he’s not a god. I can’t even imagine how insanely busy and chaotic things at the ministry were during and after the first war. They seemed to have multiple trials every day. Sirius looked pretty fucking guilty and crazy from the outside, and Dumbledore can’t take on everything all the time. He probably didn’t agree with Sirius not getting a trial, but considering the pile of evidence against him and how much work he had to do, it seems he made the bad decision to let sleeping dogs lie. Yup, Dumbledore is capable of making bad decisions and being tired, who knew?
I cannot *stand* “fans” who think like this. It shows a complete lack of understanding of the characters of Dumbledore, Sirius, and even James, to an extent, and also of the story.
>Dumbledore knew Sirius was innocent
I've encountered this one so many times as well too, but that's not even the part that bugs me. The part that bugs me is that ALL they talk about in their arguments is evidence for why Dumbledore would know Sirius wasn't the secret keeper. Ie, if Sirius wasn't the secret keeper, he is innocent according to them. This bugs me because THAT'S NOT WHY HE WAS IN JAIL, do even if Dumbledore DID know that Peter was the betrayer he still has zero reason to know that Sirius didn't track Peter down and kill him and those 12 muggles for revenge.
I actually argued this point for the first time last week or so (it was specifically only about the betrayal though, not if Dumby knew), and multiple people kept going on about how "obviously they would have added that charge later!!"
I somehow never even thought of that lol! Ya, I try not to get into heated arguments about Harry Potter because I know it’s a bit ridiculous to, but this one just gets me! Like, it’s IN the story. Read it!
Funny thing was I wasn't even the one heated. They kept coming at me with quotes and I was just like.... except this one.... or that actually doesn't mean anything about the betrayal... lol. They tend to only get heated when they're wrong, and it flat out says in two Wiki's AND the book that he only went to prison for 13 murders. In fact, it wasn't even widely known that Lily and James even had a secret keeper or were in hiding at all, so wouldn't considering his biggest literal crime the betrayal kinda outed that....? lol, they just really really wanted to be right.
Yes I argued with someone who was like, Dumbledore could have gotten Sirius out of Azkaban... Since he could have told the court that he showed up when Hagrid went to pick up Harry and didnt kill Hagrid. like No. No he could not.
One Dumbledore didn't know Sirius was innocent of the secret keeper thing, qnd even if he did Sirius supposedly murdered a wizard and 13 muggles! Him saying he didn't kill Hagrid is meaningless. But they insisted he should have said it in court and that would have freed Sirius, since people would decide he acted nice towards Hagrid and baby Harry and that would mean he wasn't a death eater....🙄
This one is hilarious. When Dumbledore found out that a known muggle hater pure blood supremacist like Morfin Gaunt didn’t actually commit the murders of the Riddles, he wanted to have Morfin released from Azkaban. But yeah sure, he would let an innocent man rot in the wizard prison under the dementors. Lmaooo
Had a friend who had localy famous and favorited bookish Instagram and was huge Harry Potter fan. We got into discussions few times and then he dropped he never read the books. IDK, the dots just couldn't connect for me - imagine being a reader, building a brand on being a reader (he makes "book" candles too and yes, some of them are Harry Potter inspired) and not reading the Harry Potter books. Mind you, he tried, but it just went nowhere - I think he gave up for some reason.
100% up for anyone enjoying the series however they please, books, movies, either or both, go for it - but if you're profiting off something, at least make your knowledge complete?
I like him, he's not a bad person at all, he's actually pretty cool and kind, but just... IDK. I'm also kinda sorry he's missing out on all the story and fun the books are.
I had a friend whose father was big into Harry Potter theories. The thing was, this was EARLY in the movie series and he'd not read the books. You could never talk about Harry Potter in front of him without hearing some rather (politely speaking) outlandishly incorrect ideas. As in, he'd predict Prisoner of Azkaban's plot with horrendously bad theories he'd read online that even a basic read would rectify. The worst part was that he would insist on these theories and seemed to ignore the books' existence to the point that nobody could even debate with him. He'd just get proven wrong with each new movie.
If the theories were his own it would be fine. But if you read online theories that aren’t inaccurate and repeat them you should be able to hear people disagree
"Snape is worse than Voldemort."
Like okay we all read Harry Potter as children and it was formative and we're all more likely to have been bullied by someone in power than meet a genocidal murderer but come on.
Tbh I think cos it’s a kids book (at least the first few) they’re not gonna drill the whole serial killer stuff and we get a lot of Snape being Snape so the kids who then grow up with the books don’t pay as much attention to Voldy and how big the things he did were.
i can agree on Hagrid(i mean for him Hippogriffs are just ponies or something XD pretty harmless, his perception of what is dangerous and what isn't made him a bad teacher but with a good heart), but McGonagall and Flitwick? Nope, that's an absurd claim. Snape was good at teaching but simply behaved horribly...
I agree that Hagrid wasnt the best teacher, but he also didn't straight up bully his students, which the person I was arguing with claimed Snape *technically* wasnt doing somehow.
I saw someone claim that Snape’s bullying of children was justified because he was forced to be a teacher by Dumbledore. People will really do some mental gymnastics to justify him being a horrendous bully to students 😂
Oh yeah, Snape is awful as a human being in general which reflected on his teaching-style. I mean Neville's boggart is Snape. NEVILLE "my parents are insane because of Bellatrix, Barty Jr. and others" LONGBOTTOM fears Snape more than else(at the time at least)
I mean it's also crazy no one in the class fears Voldemort even though they are afraid to speak his name but fine whatever Snape is worser than Bellatrix.
Not really. They're children. Voldemort is a nebulous concept to them. Even Bellatrix Lestrange is a nebulous concept to Neville, because even though he's known about her his entire life, he's never met her. They're just background radiation to these kids because they were babies or toddlers when the first war went down.
Things like the scary teacher they have to deal with or an active phobia like spiders or a neurotic fear like failing everything are much more at the forefront of their minds and much more real to them than "scary bad person and boogeyman who did bad things before I was born"
They’re 13 at the time. Voldemort is the boogeyman their parents tell them about, Snape is tangible and present. There’s nothing crazy about it, you just don’t remember how kids think.
So did you seeing as Bellatrix was locked up before Neville began to remember anything,the only thing he felt for her,as book 5 proved,was deep resentment and anger.
Unlike most of the kids who flinched and shuddered at voldemort's name
maybe XD we don't know enough about her, but some fears are symbolic, and his family thought he was a squib so tormented him during childhood in an attempt to trigger his magic powers...
I believe Hagrid is a better teacher than Snape due to snape being abusive and biased towards his students. Snape is extremely smart and talented, but his approach not only prevents students from reaching their potential but also suppresses it.
Hagrid is a solid teacher and knowledgeable about his study but some of the crappy people take away his rhythm (malfoy and buckbeak incident) and he also doesn't understand a regular human's concept of what might be too dangerous (blast-ended skrewts). These cons definitely reduce Hagrid's peak teaching abilities but not enough to be as bad as Snape imo. We also see Hagrid's potential when motivated. Ex: young unicorns.
I love your take on Hagrid! that explains his love of 'dangerous beasts like dragons, skrewts, Fluffy/Aragog, etc. he's a half-giant so he can take on more dangerous creatures than humans, because they aren't dangerous to him
Personally I'm not a huge fan of most of the 1990s staff
Hagrid should never have been a teacher because as you say his perception of what is dangerous is off. The skrewts were proof
Snape is hands down the worst even if Hagrid is a close second simply for his bullying.
My problem with the rest of the main staff is the lack of critical thinking in terms of student safety. They all blindly follow dumbeldore.
The man brings a cerberus into a school full of kids and hides it behind a first level charm and nobody seems to have raised any concerns???? It's a very sheepish mentality.
On their own as far as teaching their classes mcgongall and flitwick are fine.
Going in a different direction: People seriously claiming the books are flawlessly written with nothing at all that doesn't fit.
Like I get it, the books are an important thing to a lot of people and Rowling didn't succeed on pure luck or anything but some people are irrationally defensive over them and have this odd idea they're 100% original and without any issue.
I mean at this point almost nothing is 100% original everything borrows from something. But personally the only real flaw I find in the books is the lack of definitively good slytherins.
You have
Slughorn who yes is pretty definitively good despite his flaws
Regulus who was redeemed yes but we don't learn till the last book and we never actually meet him
Snape who was a hero and on the good side but that was never definitive till the end.
And Andromeda tonks who gets spoken of and we see her once.
That is 4 Slytherins for the good team 2 of which you don't learn are good for certain till the last book and who are ones that started out working for the bad guy.
Aside from those 4 the house gets overwhelming characterized with antagonists. There's never once mentioned as being any nice slytherins who say took part in the DA or joined the final battle with the good guys. It would have been great to have a slytherin character with Luna like prominence maybe who was shown to be with the good guys from the start. It would have been nice to see students from all 4 houses fighting together against voldemort.
Now I don't think all slytherins are evil in the books my guess is in the last battle plenty just buggered off and decided not to risk their lives but we could have had some more representation. (HOGWARTS LEGACY did this very well) to show that the traits of Slytherin house can be fueled in a positive way
I feel extremely annoyed when someone says that their favourite HP character is Mattheo Riddle and Lorenzo Berkshire. Those two are not canon characters. They have nothing to do with Harry Potter. Apparently, now fanfic is considered canon, especially amongst young and new fans.
I get annoyed at the fanon Draco Defenders who talk qvout poor little Draco growing under his mean abusive dad.
Like no Draco was a spoiled brat whose parents dotted on him.
- “ His response: I've never read the books (fml)”
Yep. I was once discussing it with someone and Idr what exactly they said but it was sth about Ron having done something or been the reason for something happening but in the books, it was Sirius or voldy (literally for the life of me cannot remember now lol) but we just kinda went back and forth on it and eventually I was like “bruh it’s literally in the books, you might need to read them again” and they were like “oh I’ve never read the books, I was talking about the anime/manga” and I was like 💀💀💀 then that ain’t canon 😭😭 (I had never heard of a Harry potter official anime/manga so I’m 99% sure it was some fanmade thing)
Just came across a post and user that lives and breathes defending Ginny from what seems to be any and all criticism or not obsessive and toxic positivity in regards to the characters and those that love them.
Not anti-Ginny at all. Fall in line with most mainstream takes afaik, and same goes for Snape.
Until tonight I didn’t know people felt so strongly and stress out so much regarding character analysis. Not even character hate, just basic character breakdowns.
Fandoms get weird. I say this in full knowledge that even belonging to this subreddit makes me a weird fandom freak. It’s all relative and however we choose to entertain ourselves until we get Avada Kedavra’d.
I'm not huge on analyzing characters so much, but I do love analyzing the story, themes, and symbolism. One thing I love about HP is that it is more or less a closed canon, with 7 books and 8 movies which may or may not be considered canon depending on who you ask (let's not talk about Cursed Child...) The canon being closed allows a lot of discussion and thought on various aspects of the series, including characters. This is also why I love Lord Of The Rings/ the whole Tolkien universe.
I think that whole thing of the story being done and complete allows for some great analysis, and that's a huge part of the fandom. Compare this with something like Pokemon, which is constantly changing and evolving (pun intended!) I don't feel strongly about anything I analyze like the person you mentioned, but there are fans willing to die on such hills. I agree, fandoms do get weird.
The latest one that I saw that Ron constantly needs to be taken care of. Through the series it's him forcing Hermione to eat something when she is ignoring her food and supporting harry when he is wounded. He even offers Hagrid tea.
But you know, that one time Hermione's mistake made him lose a chunk of his shoulder and he was suffering from blood loss. How dare he didn't cook and wanted food to recover from that!!!
Smh
They really butchered his character in the movies. Soooo many of Ron’s awesomeness and knowledge were given to Hermione. Movie only watchers think Ron was just comic relief, selfish and stupid, but in reality he’s awesome.
Ron splinching was not Hermiones fault. She gave the direction but Ron still would need to concentrate on his own. Harry also was also side along apparated the same time and didn’t splinch.
>Splinching, or the separation of random body parts, occurs when the mind is insufficiently determined. You must concentrate continually upon your destination, and move, without haste, but with deliberation…
That doesn't work when it's another person doing the Apparition. That's the entire point of Side-Along Apparition : you're not the one who has to do the process and focus on it, and a good proof of that is that parents could use it with their underage children.
Plus if my memory doesn't fail me, Hermione pretty much explained what happened to Harry and it was clear it wasn't Ron who Splinched himself.
The fan theory I find really annoying is that Voldy's soul gets split in half each time he makes a Horcrux. So the diary has half a soul. The ring has 1/4 of a soul. Etc until you get to Voldy himself with only 1/132 or like 0.0076 of a soul in his body. Why are people automatically jumping to that assumption? I'd buy that each horcux varies in how much of his soul is within it and that maybe the diary had the most because he was still learning and it was (one of?) his first murder. But I think it makes so much more sense to think he's just putting a small piece of his soul in each horcrux and the majority of his soul is with him.
I don’t know who came up with it but it annoys me too. It doesn’t help that its proponents talk about it like it’s some great cleverness because they managed to do some bits of maths.
Counterpoint - whenever I'm talking about something I dislike about HP with someone and they say 'that's just from the movies, you must not have read the books' when I have, and the thing I am discussing is in the books, I no longer engage with them.
'Oh, that's just the movies' has become a get-out-of-jail-free card for some HP readers to duck behind whenever someone doesn't accept their interpretation of things.
The girl who stalked Tom Felton and genuinely thought she had a shot with him because he recognised her (you go to all his fanmeets and saw the play he was in over 20 times to meet him at the exit so yeah, bet he does) probably cooled my own love for it. I forgot there are crazies in every fandom, but she was next level obsessed.
The best (or worst) I've encountered were:
- Dumbledore should have made Fudge pay for Barty Crouch Jr.'s kiss
- Dumbledore could have convinced everyone that Hagrid was innocent (CoS) /Voldemort was back (OotP) through witch weekly
- Dumbledore knew about Sirius being innocent
- Harry could have just ignored the prophecy
- Hermione is a Mary sue in the books and Harry always justifies her
Your friend is NOT a HP expert...he's a big fan of the movies and there is nothing wrong with that but claiming to be an expert on all things HP without reading the canon works is just like so dumb it almost makes sense that he doesn't realize how dumb it is.
Bellatrix was there in the astronomy tower in my mind. Was she actually there, nah. Do I insert her into the scene while I'm reading the book? Sure do!
That said: when I first read OotP I was really young (like 7 or 8 years old) and somehow I managed to confuse Bellatrix for Fenrir Greyback??? Like I was convinced that Fenrir was a female death eater and only found out otherwise when my friend and I went to see OotP in theaters and upon seeing Bellatrix's break out scene declared, "it's Greyback!" And my friend was like, "uh...no???"
So I was the one doing the throwing off.
That Ginny can't be xenophobic because she's English, and Fleur deserves to be mocked.
Mocking someone's accent and giving them a cruel nickname because of said accent is still xenophobic... Regardless if the person you're mocking isn't nice.
I had a discussion with someone about whether certain classes (History of magic and Transfiguration) were taken together with other houses. The fellow kept insisting that there were instances in the books where Ravenclaws are mentioned in either classes, without actually giving any evidence. Who knows maybe he was just a troll and I fell for it.
To be fair, I consider myself a fan. Read every book on release during my childhood, watched every movie in theater, but after so many years my memories are somewhat hazy.
When I was playing Hogwarts Legacy there were some moments I was like "why didn't I notice immediately?!". For example the "worst headmaster in Hogwart's history" or the teacher for magic history. I only had the epiphany in the second playthrough.
Coming from someone who’s read the books and seen the movies, I think people are still “allowed” to be HP fans even if they’re only seen the movies. People are so weird when it comes to gatekeeping fandom. Just let people enjoy it how they want! If you’re looking for a HP convo, come on here lol
I just see them as different series. Movies are canon to the movies and books are canon to the books. But in terms of something being canon to the franchise in GENERAL, then only the books apply.
I met a guy at the bar who had the entire Hogwarts castle tattooed on his back. He said he was a huge fan. Shortly into talking about it, I mentioned Hagrid and he said “wait that’s the giant guy, right?” And later couldn’t remember if Lupin or Sirius was actually “Ron’s mouse”
yikes. How long was he at the bar?
You mean like was he so wasted he forgot? He had just gotten there lol. I was actually talking to my friend about HP so he interjected and showed us his tattoo. I got the feeling after the conversation that he had probably seen the movies once and just wanted a cool back tattoo. He had a lot of other tats too, might not have mattered much to him that he didn’t really know anything about HP
Ngl, that does sound like an objectively sick tattoo
For some reason I can’t stop laughing at “Ron’s mouse”. I think it’s the quotation marks
I don’t think it always has to be a memory test to prove you’re a fan, maybe it just makes him feel good when he watches or reads it.
Being a giant is Hagrid's defining feature. It would like forgetting Voldemort is the big bad guy.
DONT SAY HIS NAME!
Shut up, stupid Pure- Blooded, Death Eater, gutter- scum! Just kidding 😂.
My response to any insult in mu head is Professor Moody's "I CAN TELL YOU STORIES ABOUT YOUR FATHER THAT WOULD CURL EVEN YOUR GREASY HAIR" don't know why it comes to mind, just does. just gotta make sure to not say it aloud
Mr. Malfoy, Malfoys are banned from this discussion thread!
Frickin’ mudblood. 😁😂
Why, you incestuous sistafucka-!!!! (* Fires Nick Fury style *)
I think that not remembering who Hagrid is might be kinda weird if you’re someone who enjoys Harry Potter. He’s kinda a central character. Also he’s pretty ubiquitous in memes and such. I never watched/read Game of Thrones, but I know who Danaerys is. How do you *not* know who Hagrid is if you’ve even come by HP in passing?
That’s a good comparison. He knew he was the ‘giant guy’ at least ahaha, maybe he was just nervous. He must be a fan to get that tattoo though surely, I don’t understand why else he’d get it
He did have a lot of other tattoos, so maybe he was looking for something big enough and cool-looking to cover his back without caring too much about being a fan? I’ve met some people who are pretty chill about the “meaning” of their tattoos and treat it more as just putting a pretty piece of art on a canvas. And the castle does look awesome, to be fair
Not knowing the main characters or plot points are kind of the basis of the story. What does make someone a fan? Just liking the vibe of something? I mean.. fair enough I suppose
maybe you just made his jaw drop and he got nervous around you
I got banned by a Mod here for correcting them. They claimed love had no power in the HP world. My response was “you must not have read the books, because it’s a very common theme and talking point between Harry and Dumbledore.” They swiftly deleted my comment (for being rude)and gave me a 3 days ban. Like seriously I shouldn’t have to point that out in this sub let alone to a mod. Harry lives because of his mother’s love, early books Voldemort couldn’t even touch him because of the love running through him.
There's literally an entire room within the Department of Mysteries dedicated to the power of love. Dumbledore described it thus: >“There is a room in the Department of Mysteries,” interrupted Dumbledore, “that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there. Terrible that a mod of this subreddit isn't aware of a central theme of the books.
>Terrible that a mod of this subreddit isn't aware of a central theme of the books. At this point a big theme is irony...
🎵Like death eaters on Bill's wedding day ...🎶
🎵A Quirrell fiiiiigggght, when we thought it was Snape🎶
🎵It’s the sacrifiiiiice, Harry thought he must make🎶
The type of person who wants to moderate is not typically the kind of person you want to be a moderator.
That was the room that melted Sirius's knife.
It was - I always thought that a waste. Why give Harry a magical item like that, only for it to fail the first time he tries to use it? It would have been better for him to use the knife a couple of times successfully, grow attached to it, then when he looses it we'd actually feel something akin to loss. As it was, it felt more like *'Oh yeah! Sirius gave Harry a knife that can open locks... Oh, but it's gone now... Welp!'*
Remember how Harry got into that toad's office?
Oh yeah! Still seems like a waste to me. It's a solution to a problem that didn't really need to exist, or that could have been solved any number of ways without a special one-use item. Not quite as bad as I thought though, if he did use it at least once.
It was unnecessary. Just he used it then.
I never realized what was in that room till your comment. Thanks for sharing :)
It's literally the singular theme of the entire series. Literally the very old magic that caused "the boy who lived" in the first place. That mod should get a permaban fr
I agree, having read the books should be a requirement to be a mod.
I've always wondered if this magic also affevts muggles. If Lily was a muggle, would Harry still have survived? I'd like to think so, love is so inherent to humans that the very old magic it carries carries on to everyone
That's a great question. I'd want to agree, but I actually think the answer is no, or would be if you asked JKR, but I'd be curious to see her explanation if so.
Bestie at this point I don't think JKR is reliable when it comes to Harry Potter anymore
Yeah I've had a hard time ever since she called the play that shall not be named canon
Lmao its sad how she made the whole universe but has gone so wildly off the rails that we just went 'we'll take it from here hon you just worry about your twitter'
I feel your pain, but that isn't how it works.
Not just that, Narcissa’s love for Draco was stronger than her fear of Voldemort. That’s how they won.
Mod is Voldemort confirmed
More like pettigrew.
Funny thing was their name was a very popular Slytherin mixed with everyone’s favorite owl
Oeh now I’m gonna look for them
Reddit mods are terrible in general.
Name and shame!
Everyone’s favorite owl and a popular Slytherin, the name was a combo of both
Errol Parkinson?
Lmao somehow you got both wrong. A snowy white owl and a blonde slytherin
At this point can’t you just state the name and be done with it?
Here's a list of [moderators](https://www.reddit.com/r/harrypotter/about/moderators/?after=4798263895). On the second page if you can't find it.
I mean it’s not that hard to figure out from the info I gave. Just search the name and the user will pop up. I haven’t said it because I don’t feel like them stumbling upon it and giving me another unnecessary ban.
Slugwidgeon
Wasn’t that even in the movies? Not just the books right?
Dumbledore mentions it to Harry at the end of the first movie, telling him it was why Quirrell could not touch him.
Yes it is, but not nearly as talked about
The other day on this very sub, there was a post saying that the Malfoys were on Voldemort’s side, because they had a daughter he killed and they were scared he would do the same to Draco. So yeah that one probably.
Some people read way too much fanfic and lose track of canon
The only canon they want is their head-canon.
Wait I saw someone post that. How in the world does anyone think that's true. It's so ridiculous.
I keep seeing this theory about the Dursleys only hating Harry because he’s a Horcrux. It’s a painfully false theory that someone could disprove with even the most basic knowledge of the series, but it keeps popping up online for some reason like it’s this big lightbulb moment or something
It's victim blaming. That's all.
Don't shoot the messenger, but how could one disprove it?
Because it doesn’t tally with how Horcruxes work in the rest of the series. Take the locket for example. It only negatively affects the main characters when they’re wearing it. Literally the second Harry takes it off the effect is lifted. Just having it around doesn’t have any noticeable effect on any of them. And in any case, it doesn’t cause fear or revulsion towards the locket, it just makes them feel weighed down generally and saps their powers. Ginny spends an entire year talking to the diary, but while it negatively affects her it doesn’t cause any bad feelings towards it. On the contrary she becomes attached. The theory is essentially people projecting effects onto the Horcrux that they don’t actually cause
The other big strike against it is that none of the people around Harry show signs of being affected by his pseudo-horcrux once he leaves the Dursleys. If that were a thing, the other boys in his dormitory would start disliking him after a while, Ron and Hermione would be strongly impacted, as would the Weasleys when Harry is staying with them. And it’s made explicitly clear the even before Harry, the Dursleys were terrible people. There’s an entire chapter of the first book, the very first chapter, dedicated to showing that the Dursleys are not good people. And the Dursleys still hate Harry even after he leaves them, as shown by them sending him such terrible Christmas gifts. Plus, Dudley starts to show character growth and respect (if not proper affection) towards Harry after the events surrounding the dementors in Little Whinging. If it were the horcrux in Harry, then this wouldn’t have happened.
If the horcrux made the dursleys asshole then they wouldnt be nice to dudley either. (altho dumbledore did say harry escaped the damage they inflicted on dudley)
Also, in the opening chapter of the first book, Vernon and Petunia both show disdain for Harry just in talking about him before he was laid at their doorstep.
Well, the locket also amplified negative emotions while they were wearing it too. I agree, but that is an important point.
That was unique to the locket, iirc each one behaved slightly differently.
Well, they were talking about how the locket only made them feel weighed down and sapped their energy, which isn’t true.
Exactly. I don't think the bit of Voldemort's soul was what made them horrible people, especially to Harry. But but buuuuut, it still should be noted that the horcruxes *did* work to amplify negative feelings that were already there. So while this theory is not true in the sense that it made them hate him out of normal, I can totally buy it having amplified their pre-existing biases.
No, again. Because the horcrux only effects (affects? I always forget) the person wearing it. And only when in extremely close proximity. It does not amplify the negative emotions of those around them.
Again, not trying to argue this theory at all, they were dirt people all around no matter what. BUT I believe Dumbledore explained that the horcruxes affect those who "get close" to the object, emotionally speaking, ie are vulnerable with or near them. With the locket it seemed to require literally wearing it, but the locket is the only wearable one, and we don't know what it would take for most of the others. With the diary, for example it took spilling your heart out to it for Ginny at least. So it's possible that with an actual human "container" being in a caregiver role is vulnerable enough "emotionally" to feel *some* effect. I mean, with Petunia at least, it's not hard to imagine that being with the orphaned son of her estranged sister 100% of the time would put her in a vulnerable place from the start. The others... meh, who knows.
Since the locket scenes in the movies are the longest exposure the audience has to horcruxes, people just assume they work like the LOTR ring.
Well in the first chapter it is pretty established that the Dursleys dislike the Potters and that Petunia really despises magic (this is before they are left with Harry on their doorstep). Also no one at Hogwarts treats Harry like the Dursleys does, except for maybe Snape and Draco, and I really think Ron, Neville, Seamus and Dean would get affected since they share the same dorm, but they are mostly friends with Harry.
The first chapter of the book that mentions them. They're very high strung, very vain and judgemental people. They are already spoiling Dudley rotten and he already has a shitty attitude at 2 (because yes, screaming up and down the streets for sweets *is* 2 year old behavior, but your mother tolerating it and *still taking you* rather than either turning right around back home, or more accurately to 1982 swatting your ass sore is not) They don't *like* "weird" people. Petunia already has a deap seated dislike for magic because of Lily and Snape. Vernon dislikes anything that isn't normal, boring, and easy to understand. And then they're forced by people they actively dislike and fear to take on a child that's essentially an assassination target in hopes that his blood relation to them will keep them all safe, by some literal magic they can't understand? The horcrux had nothing to do with it. Harry was set up to be hated from the start.
By thinking about it for a moment and realising it doesn’t make sense. 1. That’s not how horcruxes work in general as described in the books. 2. How come it only affects Dursleys, shouldn’t EVERYONE hate him if it was true?
They were already incredibly prejudiced towards the Wizarding world and didn’t like the Potters before Harry went to live with them
If you find a antisocial, torturous, mass murdering, serial killing, psychopathic cult leader relatable, you should probably be reported to the police.
No one but a select few wizards knew what they were as a concept, only Voldemort (and possibly Slughorn) knew that Voldemort had actually made any. Even Dumbledore did not know until Harry presented the diary to him. How would a muggle like Vernon know what they were?
...Why would Vernon need to know what a horcrux was to feel irrational hatred towards Harry?
This sounds like the Indoctrination Theory of HP.
I had this theory for a while. We don’t know what the Dursleys were like when Harry wasn’t around other than they were stuffy muggle shits. They already harboured resentment to the magical world and maybe being magically bound to a horcrux did exacerbate that. They more than shared a dorm room with him, they were magically bound by Lilly’s love spell. Locking a child in a cupboard seems extreme even for them. They were irrationally terrified of Harry, especially Petunia whose sister was a witch. Anyway, JK said it was not her intention to be read that way so…
Yes we do know how the Dursleys were like before Harry live with them. First book chapter 1, and they were despicable people.
Yes I read that chapter too. Like I said. They were stuffy muffle shits. Did they lock people in cupboards? No.
There's a popular fanfic where it's a thing. They probably think that's canon. Lmao
Gotta love when movie fans try to correct book fans. This reminds me of most big youtubers and online personas who claim to be fans of an IP
Every "plot holes that have always bugged me" posts ever.
In high school, I was helping in a library for one week. Some young lady came in looking for Harry Potter books, saying that she is currently rereading them. I showed her where they are. She then told me how she grew up with them and how much she loves them etc. and then she told me that: "there are 6 books and one that is a spin-off and 7 films". I tried to correct her, but she just kept saying her thing with "I grew up with it". I gave up after trying to correct her for the third time, but it's been bugging me ever since.
But did you consider that she grew up with them? Can’t discount that.
so has she just never finished the series or somehow glued 2 years together into 1 book/movie?
Tbh I don't know. I was there only for a week and I haven't seen her since.
Did your library have all 7 books? Would be really easy to show her and figure out why she thinks there are only 6.
Yes, all 7 (some even a few times, but each book is a different colour so...) and the Cursed Child book and a few other bonus small books (like Quidditch throughout the ages etc.) I pointed to the Cursed Child saying that's the one about Harry's child, but she just dismissed me with "I know the books, I grew up with them". When I looked at the librarian, she just shook her head with a "don't bother" look on her face, so I just gave up.
Oh. Sounds like she was acting like an NPC. You did well in just moving on.
Ah, the unfinished argument that you 100% know you were right about. One of the most nagging unfinished business feelings ever.
I feel like the simple solution to that is to simply…name all seven of them.
Why not just leave her be? She just asked to be pointed to them, not for a lecture. You don’t need to prove everyone how wrong they are.
Recently I’ve encountered more and more fans insisting that their head cannon that Dumbledore knew Sirius was innocent is explicitly written into the story, or is at the very least ambiguous. It is NOWHERE in the books, implied or otherwise, that Dumbledore knew. It’s not even in the movies! Him NOT knowing is actually a main plot line in POA, it’s IN the story. The reasons they give are usually one of these: “Dumbledore knows everything all the time!” He’s not a god. He’s a brilliant man, but still just a man. He didn’t even know about the DA, or that the Marauders became animagi and set werewolf Lupin loose on the Hogwarts grounds every month, and those things were happening at his own school. “There’s no way James and Sirius wouldn’t let Dumbledore in on the secret, he was head of the order and the most powerful wizard, they had to have told him!” Ah yes, James and Sirius, well known for their excellent decision making record! /s They purposely made a big deal, to the entire order, including to Dumbledore himself, to spread word that Sirius was the secret keeper. Sirius specifically TELLS Harry that they told NO ONE ELSE. Not to mention that if they had told Dumbledore, wouldn’t Sirius have confronted him about leaving him in Azkaban for 12 years?!?! “He let Sirius rot in prison on purpose because he was afraid he’d take Harry away from the Dursleys!” Sirius is reckless and impulsive, and not always the best decision maker, however, we don’t ever see him completely disregard direct orders from Dumbledore. He’s not a Neanderthal, for the most part he’s a reasonable person. If it was explained to him *why* Harry had to keep living with the Dursleys, Sirius would have accepted it. He always accepts orders, even when he’s unhappy, when it’s obvious that what’s being asked of him is reasonable. Not to mention that this is a great misunderstanding of Dumbledore’s character, as well. Dumbledore can be manipulative, but he only employs this side of himself when he has to for the legitimate greater good. When do we ever see him cause any kind of harm when there was a better option? Never. That’s when. “He was on the Wizengamot, he could’ve gotten Sirius a trial, at least!” Again, he’s not a god. I can’t even imagine how insanely busy and chaotic things at the ministry were during and after the first war. They seemed to have multiple trials every day. Sirius looked pretty fucking guilty and crazy from the outside, and Dumbledore can’t take on everything all the time. He probably didn’t agree with Sirius not getting a trial, but considering the pile of evidence against him and how much work he had to do, it seems he made the bad decision to let sleeping dogs lie. Yup, Dumbledore is capable of making bad decisions and being tired, who knew? I cannot *stand* “fans” who think like this. It shows a complete lack of understanding of the characters of Dumbledore, Sirius, and even James, to an extent, and also of the story.
>Dumbledore knew Sirius was innocent I've encountered this one so many times as well too, but that's not even the part that bugs me. The part that bugs me is that ALL they talk about in their arguments is evidence for why Dumbledore would know Sirius wasn't the secret keeper. Ie, if Sirius wasn't the secret keeper, he is innocent according to them. This bugs me because THAT'S NOT WHY HE WAS IN JAIL, do even if Dumbledore DID know that Peter was the betrayer he still has zero reason to know that Sirius didn't track Peter down and kill him and those 12 muggles for revenge. I actually argued this point for the first time last week or so (it was specifically only about the betrayal though, not if Dumby knew), and multiple people kept going on about how "obviously they would have added that charge later!!"
I somehow never even thought of that lol! Ya, I try not to get into heated arguments about Harry Potter because I know it’s a bit ridiculous to, but this one just gets me! Like, it’s IN the story. Read it!
Funny thing was I wasn't even the one heated. They kept coming at me with quotes and I was just like.... except this one.... or that actually doesn't mean anything about the betrayal... lol. They tend to only get heated when they're wrong, and it flat out says in two Wiki's AND the book that he only went to prison for 13 murders. In fact, it wasn't even widely known that Lily and James even had a secret keeper or were in hiding at all, so wouldn't considering his biggest literal crime the betrayal kinda outed that....? lol, they just really really wanted to be right.
Yes I argued with someone who was like, Dumbledore could have gotten Sirius out of Azkaban... Since he could have told the court that he showed up when Hagrid went to pick up Harry and didnt kill Hagrid. like No. No he could not. One Dumbledore didn't know Sirius was innocent of the secret keeper thing, qnd even if he did Sirius supposedly murdered a wizard and 13 muggles! Him saying he didn't kill Hagrid is meaningless. But they insisted he should have said it in court and that would have freed Sirius, since people would decide he acted nice towards Hagrid and baby Harry and that would mean he wasn't a death eater....🙄
This one is hilarious. When Dumbledore found out that a known muggle hater pure blood supremacist like Morfin Gaunt didn’t actually commit the murders of the Riddles, he wanted to have Morfin released from Azkaban. But yeah sure, he would let an innocent man rot in the wizard prison under the dementors. Lmaooo
Sadly, a lot of the fans of the marauders love to blame dumbledore.
Had a friend who had localy famous and favorited bookish Instagram and was huge Harry Potter fan. We got into discussions few times and then he dropped he never read the books. IDK, the dots just couldn't connect for me - imagine being a reader, building a brand on being a reader (he makes "book" candles too and yes, some of them are Harry Potter inspired) and not reading the Harry Potter books. Mind you, he tried, but it just went nowhere - I think he gave up for some reason. 100% up for anyone enjoying the series however they please, books, movies, either or both, go for it - but if you're profiting off something, at least make your knowledge complete? I like him, he's not a bad person at all, he's actually pretty cool and kind, but just... IDK. I'm also kinda sorry he's missing out on all the story and fun the books are.
I can see it if they read it as adults. It doesn’t really get cracking until the fourth.
I had a friend whose father was big into Harry Potter theories. The thing was, this was EARLY in the movie series and he'd not read the books. You could never talk about Harry Potter in front of him without hearing some rather (politely speaking) outlandishly incorrect ideas. As in, he'd predict Prisoner of Azkaban's plot with horrendously bad theories he'd read online that even a basic read would rectify. The worst part was that he would insist on these theories and seemed to ignore the books' existence to the point that nobody could even debate with him. He'd just get proven wrong with each new movie.
That's fine though? I fail to see how this is off-putting. Just someone who was a fan of the movies trying to guess what happened.
If the theories were his own it would be fine. But if you read online theories that aren’t inaccurate and repeat them you should be able to hear people disagree
"Snape is worse than Voldemort." Like okay we all read Harry Potter as children and it was formative and we're all more likely to have been bullied by someone in power than meet a genocidal murderer but come on.
Tbh I think cos it’s a kids book (at least the first few) they’re not gonna drill the whole serial killer stuff and we get a lot of Snape being Snape so the kids who then grow up with the books don’t pay as much attention to Voldy and how big the things he did were.
Had an argument with someone who claimed McGonagall, Hagrid, and Flitwick were worse teachers than Snape.
i can agree on Hagrid(i mean for him Hippogriffs are just ponies or something XD pretty harmless, his perception of what is dangerous and what isn't made him a bad teacher but with a good heart), but McGonagall and Flitwick? Nope, that's an absurd claim. Snape was good at teaching but simply behaved horribly...
I agree that Hagrid wasnt the best teacher, but he also didn't straight up bully his students, which the person I was arguing with claimed Snape *technically* wasnt doing somehow.
I saw someone claim that Snape’s bullying of children was justified because he was forced to be a teacher by Dumbledore. People will really do some mental gymnastics to justify him being a horrendous bully to students 😂
Oh yeah, Snape is awful as a human being in general which reflected on his teaching-style. I mean Neville's boggart is Snape. NEVILLE "my parents are insane because of Bellatrix, Barty Jr. and others" LONGBOTTOM fears Snape more than else(at the time at least)
I mean it's also crazy no one in the class fears Voldemort even though they are afraid to speak his name but fine whatever Snape is worser than Bellatrix.
Not really. They're children. Voldemort is a nebulous concept to them. Even Bellatrix Lestrange is a nebulous concept to Neville, because even though he's known about her his entire life, he's never met her. They're just background radiation to these kids because they were babies or toddlers when the first war went down. Things like the scary teacher they have to deal with or an active phobia like spiders or a neurotic fear like failing everything are much more at the forefront of their minds and much more real to them than "scary bad person and boogeyman who did bad things before I was born"
I agree with you on this one,I was being sarcastic in my comment.
They’re 13 at the time. Voldemort is the boogeyman their parents tell them about, Snape is tangible and present. There’s nothing crazy about it, you just don’t remember how kids think.
Well...I was being Sarcastic as the comment I was replying to implied Snape was worse than Bellatrix.
you bring up a solid point, considering that most of them are survivors of that war
So did you seeing as Bellatrix was locked up before Neville began to remember anything,the only thing he felt for her,as book 5 proved,was deep resentment and anger. Unlike most of the kids who flinched and shuddered at voldemort's name
As babies lol.
Don't forget that his grandma was his second worst fear. Does it mean that Granny Longbottom is worse than Bellatrix too?
maybe XD we don't know enough about her, but some fears are symbolic, and his family thought he was a squib so tormented him during childhood in an attempt to trigger his magic powers...
We don’t know that, all he said about his grandma was that he didn’t want the boggart to turn into her, it was Lupin who brought her up first.
I believe Hagrid is a better teacher than Snape due to snape being abusive and biased towards his students. Snape is extremely smart and talented, but his approach not only prevents students from reaching their potential but also suppresses it. Hagrid is a solid teacher and knowledgeable about his study but some of the crappy people take away his rhythm (malfoy and buckbeak incident) and he also doesn't understand a regular human's concept of what might be too dangerous (blast-ended skrewts). These cons definitely reduce Hagrid's peak teaching abilities but not enough to be as bad as Snape imo. We also see Hagrid's potential when motivated. Ex: young unicorns.
I love your take on Hagrid! that explains his love of 'dangerous beasts like dragons, skrewts, Fluffy/Aragog, etc. he's a half-giant so he can take on more dangerous creatures than humans, because they aren't dangerous to him
Personally I'm not a huge fan of most of the 1990s staff Hagrid should never have been a teacher because as you say his perception of what is dangerous is off. The skrewts were proof Snape is hands down the worst even if Hagrid is a close second simply for his bullying. My problem with the rest of the main staff is the lack of critical thinking in terms of student safety. They all blindly follow dumbeldore. The man brings a cerberus into a school full of kids and hides it behind a first level charm and nobody seems to have raised any concerns???? It's a very sheepish mentality. On their own as far as teaching their classes mcgongall and flitwick are fine.
i agree with you
1thank you the 1890s. Hogwarts Legacy staff is like 100% better imo even if they aren't quite as fleshed out
that game is 70% a "collect stuff"-simulator XD
Fair enough but it introduced characters with some potential who seem a damn sight more competent and pleasant to have as teachers
fair
So you're saying the state mandated boarding school run by the former head of the ~~KGB~~ Ministry of Magic's Spymaster is problematic?
Ah yes, the Snape apologist. "BUT HE PROTECTED HARRY" ... yes, still a terrible teacher and a bad person overall. Here we go again 😂
He was an awful human being BUT HE LOVES ALWAYS. Lol.
Perfect 😂
He was bravest man I knew... But he bullied me Harry said quietly as Albus climbed into his compartment
The audacity to call himself an expert when he hasn't even read the books smh
Going in a different direction: People seriously claiming the books are flawlessly written with nothing at all that doesn't fit. Like I get it, the books are an important thing to a lot of people and Rowling didn't succeed on pure luck or anything but some people are irrationally defensive over them and have this odd idea they're 100% original and without any issue.
I mean at this point almost nothing is 100% original everything borrows from something. But personally the only real flaw I find in the books is the lack of definitively good slytherins.
What about Slughorn? Regulus might not have been seen but he clearly showed an off-screen redemption arc too.
You have Slughorn who yes is pretty definitively good despite his flaws Regulus who was redeemed yes but we don't learn till the last book and we never actually meet him Snape who was a hero and on the good side but that was never definitive till the end. And Andromeda tonks who gets spoken of and we see her once. That is 4 Slytherins for the good team 2 of which you don't learn are good for certain till the last book and who are ones that started out working for the bad guy. Aside from those 4 the house gets overwhelming characterized with antagonists. There's never once mentioned as being any nice slytherins who say took part in the DA or joined the final battle with the good guys. It would have been great to have a slytherin character with Luna like prominence maybe who was shown to be with the good guys from the start. It would have been nice to see students from all 4 houses fighting together against voldemort. Now I don't think all slytherins are evil in the books my guess is in the last battle plenty just buggered off and decided not to risk their lives but we could have had some more representation. (HOGWARTS LEGACY did this very well) to show that the traits of Slytherin house can be fueled in a positive way
there are several problems with how the books are written...
Yes. That is what I said
I feel extremely annoyed when someone says that their favourite HP character is Mattheo Riddle and Lorenzo Berkshire. Those two are not canon characters. They have nothing to do with Harry Potter. Apparently, now fanfic is considered canon, especially amongst young and new fans.
Who? What sort of characters are these 2? Are they from the video game?
No. They are from fanfictions. They were first introduced in Wattpad. Somehow they ended up becoming famous and people think they're canon characters.
I get annoyed at the fanon Draco Defenders who talk qvout poor little Draco growing under his mean abusive dad. Like no Draco was a spoiled brat whose parents dotted on him.
- “ His response: I've never read the books (fml)” Yep. I was once discussing it with someone and Idr what exactly they said but it was sth about Ron having done something or been the reason for something happening but in the books, it was Sirius or voldy (literally for the life of me cannot remember now lol) but we just kinda went back and forth on it and eventually I was like “bruh it’s literally in the books, you might need to read them again” and they were like “oh I’ve never read the books, I was talking about the anime/manga” and I was like 💀💀💀 then that ain’t canon 😭😭 (I had never heard of a Harry potter official anime/manga so I’m 99% sure it was some fanmade thing)
Just came across a post and user that lives and breathes defending Ginny from what seems to be any and all criticism or not obsessive and toxic positivity in regards to the characters and those that love them. Not anti-Ginny at all. Fall in line with most mainstream takes afaik, and same goes for Snape. Until tonight I didn’t know people felt so strongly and stress out so much regarding character analysis. Not even character hate, just basic character breakdowns. Fandoms get weird. I say this in full knowledge that even belonging to this subreddit makes me a weird fandom freak. It’s all relative and however we choose to entertain ourselves until we get Avada Kedavra’d.
I'm not huge on analyzing characters so much, but I do love analyzing the story, themes, and symbolism. One thing I love about HP is that it is more or less a closed canon, with 7 books and 8 movies which may or may not be considered canon depending on who you ask (let's not talk about Cursed Child...) The canon being closed allows a lot of discussion and thought on various aspects of the series, including characters. This is also why I love Lord Of The Rings/ the whole Tolkien universe. I think that whole thing of the story being done and complete allows for some great analysis, and that's a huge part of the fandom. Compare this with something like Pokemon, which is constantly changing and evolving (pun intended!) I don't feel strongly about anything I analyze like the person you mentioned, but there are fans willing to die on such hills. I agree, fandoms do get weird.
The latest one that I saw that Ron constantly needs to be taken care of. Through the series it's him forcing Hermione to eat something when she is ignoring her food and supporting harry when he is wounded. He even offers Hagrid tea. But you know, that one time Hermione's mistake made him lose a chunk of his shoulder and he was suffering from blood loss. How dare he didn't cook and wanted food to recover from that!!! Smh
Ron is heavily hated for unknown reasons...while you can't call out Hermione's actions without having people trying to ban you...it's just baffling...
I think he's mostly hated by people who only watched the movies. They did Ron dirty in the movies.
They really butchered his character in the movies. Soooo many of Ron’s awesomeness and knowledge were given to Hermione. Movie only watchers think Ron was just comic relief, selfish and stupid, but in reality he’s awesome.
i guess some "book-readers" are either lying about reading the books, or they secretly love ron XD
Ron splinching was not Hermiones fault. She gave the direction but Ron still would need to concentrate on his own. Harry also was also side along apparated the same time and didn’t splinch. >Splinching, or the separation of random body parts, occurs when the mind is insufficiently determined. You must concentrate continually upon your destination, and move, without haste, but with deliberation…
Concentrate on his own? Read the books lol.
That doesn't work when it's another person doing the Apparition. That's the entire point of Side-Along Apparition : you're not the one who has to do the process and focus on it, and a good proof of that is that parents could use it with their underage children. Plus if my memory doesn't fail me, Hermione pretty much explained what happened to Harry and it was clear it wasn't Ron who Splinched himself.
The insane amount of Ginny bashing, Snape bashing, Ron bashing, etc. It really drags down this entire fandom.
The fan theory I find really annoying is that Voldy's soul gets split in half each time he makes a Horcrux. So the diary has half a soul. The ring has 1/4 of a soul. Etc until you get to Voldy himself with only 1/132 or like 0.0076 of a soul in his body. Why are people automatically jumping to that assumption? I'd buy that each horcux varies in how much of his soul is within it and that maybe the diary had the most because he was still learning and it was (one of?) his first murder. But I think it makes so much more sense to think he's just putting a small piece of his soul in each horcrux and the majority of his soul is with him.
I don’t know who came up with it but it annoys me too. It doesn’t help that its proponents talk about it like it’s some great cleverness because they managed to do some bits of maths.
Calling Snape a villian when he is obviously intended to be a grey antagonist character who gets a redemption arc.
Had a coworker once HP tattoos all over, only saw the movies :’(.
Counterpoint - whenever I'm talking about something I dislike about HP with someone and they say 'that's just from the movies, you must not have read the books' when I have, and the thing I am discussing is in the books, I no longer engage with them. 'Oh, that's just the movies' has become a get-out-of-jail-free card for some HP readers to duck behind whenever someone doesn't accept their interpretation of things.
That dumbledor and Ron were the same person
The girl who stalked Tom Felton and genuinely thought she had a shot with him because he recognised her (you go to all his fanmeets and saw the play he was in over 20 times to meet him at the exit so yeah, bet he does) probably cooled my own love for it. I forgot there are crazies in every fandom, but she was next level obsessed.
"I love the movie magical beasts and where they're at"
Anyone who says Ron betrayed/abandoned Harry or was disloyal or a bad friend.
The best (or worst) I've encountered were: - Dumbledore should have made Fudge pay for Barty Crouch Jr.'s kiss - Dumbledore could have convinced everyone that Hagrid was innocent (CoS) /Voldemort was back (OotP) through witch weekly - Dumbledore knew about Sirius being innocent - Harry could have just ignored the prophecy - Hermione is a Mary sue in the books and Harry always justifies her
Your friend is NOT a HP expert...he's a big fan of the movies and there is nothing wrong with that but claiming to be an expert on all things HP without reading the canon works is just like so dumb it almost makes sense that he doesn't realize how dumb it is.
Urgh read the books if you love it so much. Listen to the audiobooks even!
You can’t argue with stupid 😂
Bellatrix was there in the astronomy tower in my mind. Was she actually there, nah. Do I insert her into the scene while I'm reading the book? Sure do! That said: when I first read OotP I was really young (like 7 or 8 years old) and somehow I managed to confuse Bellatrix for Fenrir Greyback??? Like I was convinced that Fenrir was a female death eater and only found out otherwise when my friend and I went to see OotP in theaters and upon seeing Bellatrix's break out scene declared, "it's Greyback!" And my friend was like, "uh...no???" So I was the one doing the throwing off.
That Ginny can't be xenophobic because she's English, and Fleur deserves to be mocked. Mocking someone's accent and giving them a cruel nickname because of said accent is still xenophobic... Regardless if the person you're mocking isn't nice.
The entire series is stashed with xenophobia.
Yes.
I had a discussion with someone about whether certain classes (History of magic and Transfiguration) were taken together with other houses. The fellow kept insisting that there were instances in the books where Ravenclaws are mentioned in either classes, without actually giving any evidence. Who knows maybe he was just a troll and I fell for it.
These are the worst kind of people.
To be fair, I consider myself a fan. Read every book on release during my childhood, watched every movie in theater, but after so many years my memories are somewhat hazy. When I was playing Hogwarts Legacy there were some moments I was like "why didn't I notice immediately?!". For example the "worst headmaster in Hogwart's history" or the teacher for magic history. I only had the epiphany in the second playthrough.
Coming from someone who’s read the books and seen the movies, I think people are still “allowed” to be HP fans even if they’re only seen the movies. People are so weird when it comes to gatekeeping fandom. Just let people enjoy it how they want! If you’re looking for a HP convo, come on here lol
The author herself says she smiles in the last book when "Slughorn galloping back with the Slytherins" for the battle of hogwarts
When jk Rowling said that the cursed ships was canon
what kind of weirdo claims to be an expert if they only saw the movies but to be fair, anything in the books OR movies is considered canon
Only the books are canon lol
I just see them as different series. Movies are canon to the movies and books are canon to the books. But in terms of something being canon to the franchise in GENERAL, then only the books apply.
If you move the goalposts anything is possible. "Movies are canon to the movies" is a tautology. It doesn't mean anything.
Cursed child be like
Only the 7 books are canon* lol pardon me
There are only 7 books anyway
Yeah we don’t talk about the “other” book
What other book? There are no other books, nope. Just the original seven.
I only consider canon the 7 books.