Here's a thought.

Let's stop being so concerned with the opinions of some uneducated narcissistic Jew douchebag.

But, you know. Whatever.

Edit: Stop whining because I called him a Jew. He's Jewish, and thus a Jew. Get over it.

 

... Really?

 

I fail to see the problem there.

 

I had a theory (inspired by working in software development) that any society with a male to female ratio higher than X turns into 4chan. So far, DLP is supporting this theory nicely. I think I'll stick to Santi's private group from now.

 

Yeah I know.

 

This story is fucking terrible. It isn't close to being the worst, it isn't close to being the best; it's irrelevant. Anyone who steps away from the computer with swelling pride concerning a piece of fiction that uses somebody else's world is a dipshit of the highest caliber in the first place.

Move the fuck on.

 

One of these things is not like the others...

 

Uneducated?

 

I'm not at all interested, so be sure to share that theory with Sesc via PM.

 

Retarded post aside, the point stands - wikipedia is shit.

I actually agree about the book - linked to it because there's some irony in a wikipedia page about a book that says wikipedia is evil.

 

He says it's evil because it takes away sales from Encyclopedia Britannica. That's just flat-out retarded.

 

How about we stop reviewing ANs or wiki pages?

Unless, of course, ANs are the only things that are still worth reviewing in this story; in which case, might as well close the thread (again).

Your call.

 

This, except about 600 posts ago.

 

Unfortunately so.

 

And there was Light.

 

This opening of the thread was kinda my fault. I hope this will turn for the better and not for the worse.

MoR, as always, remains balancing on the verge of bad and good, and is as great as it is terrible. Less Wrong has done great and terrible things, indeed.

I’m here to, hopefully, get an interesting debate or two out, and afterwards I can only hope that it will not escalate to threads getting closed again.




The story hasn’t ended yet, but by all reckoning, we are in the final confrontation phase (we have hours of the narrative left at most, but it might take more than a couple chapters yet). It’s still the first year, rather, the end of it, and the updates are very much frequent these days. As I understood it, they sparked together with a small donation drive, but now I can’t find any evidence of that. Equally missing is the bit that told about this being a finale.

I might have made it up, so don’t go guaranteeing that it’s the very end, or that there was a repeated issue with donations.

Whatever the case, it certainly is the end of the first year.



And boy, are there a few strokes of genius there, as the ending develops. The sad part is that it also has the worst things possible right next to the genius gems, and that makes me mad at the story. I just can’t condemn it completely, not for giving me this much fun, but I cannot help but hate it for themes and values that I find repulsive.


So, what is this finale, and why it has me both dreading and waiting for the next update?

Be careful if you don’t want to get spoiled - I will mark the most spoilery parts, but afterwards I still might spoiler some earlier scenes by talking about the current events. So - Spoilers Ahoy - you have been warned.


First and foremost, the final confrontation starts a bit cliche, but drops a plot twist on us, one that is my main reason of coming here. It explains just how Harry is such a prodigy. And no, it’s not the fact that he had a couple of years of advanced study and reading as opposed to cannon Harry.

It’s simple, and genius at that-

Spoiler

there is no Harry Potter. Never has been. Harry Potter - nearly all of him - died on the Helloween that Voldemort arrived to kill him. Tom Riddle, having heard the prophecy, and the bit about his equal, decided to play the fate and turn that infant into his equal by using some Horcrux variation. It went wrong, and he was banished as he gave life to a memory-less Tom Riddle mk.II. The main difference is that “Harry” doesn’t seem to be as sociopathic as Tom, a point that comes up a bit later. So all that genius and intellect Harry didn’t have? That’s Tom Riddle. If Tom had been exposed to science at the orphanage, if his potential was used this way.

It also explains why the Marauders Map was stolen from the Twins.

Spoiler

It shows both Quirrell and Harry as Tom Riddle.

There’s a weaker scene where all kind of nonsense is happening around Harry as he’s trying to figure out what he has to do to make the timeline consistent - as he’s following his own note from the future to go to the third floor corridor, and there he meets a lot of people who shouldn’t be there.

Immediately afterwards, Quirrell joins in, and Harry starts thinking. He makes a connection that every reader made instantly, and the one that has been hinted since the very start. It’s at least a decently written deduction that makes sense.

Spoiler

Yes, Quirrell is - and isn’t - Voldemort. Let me explain. Quirrell is Tom Riddle, first and foremost. The distinction between Voldemort and Tom Riddle is important, as Voldemort is explained (a bit later) as a fake personality Tom created after school. You could say - to test a theory. More on this later.

Harry makes the connection when he considers what he didn’t before, and realises that Riddle is right next to him.

We have the ending of the chapter. I think both this one and at least another chapters after that ends with “say my name” cliche.

Spoiler

Harry's mouth was dry, even his lips were trembling with adrenaline, but he managed to speak. "Hello, Lord Voldemort."
Professor Quirrell inclined his head in acknowledgement, and said, "Hello, Tom Riddle."

Later we have

Spoiler

The real Dumbledore's face was set, and grim.
"Hello, Tom," said Albus Dumbledore.

In my opinion, a weak stylistic choice for chapter endings, but what can you do, but thread on. Now, this next bit is terrible.
You see, Harry is threatened at gunpoint. No, I kid you not. In the world of magic, facing an opponent that is magnitudes more powerful and experienced, Harry is forced to comply with a gun. Gah!

I don’t even. I tried to ignore it, but the gun is constantly, constantly brought up in narration.

Thats a new low, even if you factor in the discussion that ‘If Harry didn’t die from a killing curse, he might not die from it again, so you’re better off using some mundane, non-magical means to end him’. Which makes it somewhat bearable. Until another mention.

What follows - is a conversation about everything, with explanations, reasons and all other things. The fun if cheezy and lazy aspect I’ve seen in fanfics before is that speaking in Parseltongue you cannot lie. The whole conversation is built upon that rule.

If you ignore the dubious reveal of the rule itself (you cannot lie in parseltongue), the conversation that follows is great. I have a personal preference for Dresden-like fae dealings, where either one or both parties are unable to lie, but are trying to trick and play each other all the same.

"Have not betrayed you yet," Harry hissed.

And

My mind that you assked to devisse sstrategy may perhapss have been influenced by ssuch an intent - who knowss? Knew you would be ssusspiciouss, assk thiss very question. Decission is up to you (...) I know nothing you do not know, about whether thiss iss likely to trap you. Do not call it betrayal by me if you choosse thiss for yoursself, and it failss.

"I suppose there are some threats from an inventive mind that even questioning in Parseltongue cannot neutralize."

I cannot help but enjoy these kind of exchanges to the fullest.


The Mirror of Erised is made to be more than it was in canon, but that’s agency of the writer, and I accepted it easily. The plan to get out the Philosopher's Stone - also a curious exercise in deception and plotting.


There are two more glaring/controversial issues that hide between the fun and exciting conversation. These are perhaps what I wish to hear other’s opinion on the most, but as I’ve left them to last, I fear your attention has already vaned.

First of the two is the revelation of who and what truly is Voldemort. I did not like it for the most part, but I can’t deny that some bit of myself enjoyed this sort of spin. Even if it wasn’t new.

Spoiler

Tom Riddle created Voldemort specifically to play the role of cliche villain, and was at the same time trying to build a power base to support his another alter ego, David Monroe. Relevant quote:

Before becoming a truly terrible Dark Lord for David Monroe to fight, I first created for practice the persona of a Dark Lord with glowing red eyes, pointlessly cruel to his underlings, pursuing a political agenda of naked personal ambition combined with blood purism as argued by drunks in Knockturn Alley. My first underlings were hired in a tavern, given cloaks and skull masks, and told to introduce themselves as Death Eaters.

His plans crashed as he encountered what he calls the expectations of wizarding world heroes, which leads us right to the next point Less Wrong makes:

Wizards are stupid and wizarding world is bad.

Gah. Fun is made of the wizarding world. All the flaws are made ever more glaring, and the inconsistencies are pointed out.
You will wonder how a country can manage to employ three of its four citizens in bureaucracy. The answer is that if they did not all prevent each other from doing their jobs, none of them would have any work left to do!
...
All you can expect from Muggle-wank... You might find here. I’ll give him one thing. He never goes out and point out that Muggles are better or superior. He just points out the flaws.

And then, the world’s view on heroes. Keeping in mind the plan in the spoiler above, Tom Riddle was hoping to build a stronger base, when he ran into the attitude. I hate it. I hate this assumption with a passion. But according to this story, the wizarding world wants it’s heroes to be subservient.

A long, relevant quote ahead:

Spoiler

But my true epiphany came on a certain day when David Monroe was trying to get an entry permit for an Asian instructor in combat tactics, and a Ministry clerk denied it, smiling smugly. I asked the Ministry clerk if he understood that this measure was meant to save his life and the Ministry clerk only smiled more. Then in fury I threw aside masks and caution, I used my Legilimency, I dipped my fingers into the cesspit of his stupidity and tore out the truth from his mind. I did not understand and I wanted to understand. With my command of Legilimency I forced his tiny clerk-brain to live out alternatives, seeing what his clerk-brain would think of Lucius Malfoy, or Lord Voldemort, or Dumbledore standing in my place.
What I finally realized that day is complicated, boy, which is why I did not understand it earlier in life. To you I shall try to describe it anyway. Today I know that Dumbledore does not stand at the top of the world, for all that he is the Supreme Mugwump of the International Confederation. People speak ill of Dumbledore openly, they criticize him proudly and to his face, in a way they would not dare stand up to Lucius Malfoy. You have acted disrespectfully toward Dumbledore, boy, do you know why you did so?
Wolves, dogs, even chickens, fight for dominance among themselves. What I finally understood, from that clerk's mind, was that to him Lucius Malfoy had dominance, Lord Voldemort had dominance, and David Monroe and Albus Dumbledore did not. By taking the side of good, by professing to abide in the light, we had made ourselves unthreatening.In Britain, Lucius Malfoy has dominance, for he can call in your loans, or send Ministry bureaucrats against your shop, or crucify you in the Daily Prophet, if you go openly against his will. And the most powerful wizard in the world has no dominance, because everyone knows that he is, a hero out of stories, relentlessly self-effacing and too humble for vengeance. Tell me, child, have you ever seen a drama where the hero, before he consents to save his country, demands so much gold as a barrister might receive for a court case?
(...)
In magical drama (...) It is all humble heroes like Dumbledore. It is the fantasy of the powerful slave who will never truly rise above you, never demand your respect, never even ask you for pay. Do you understand now?
(...)
Step into the role of a savior out of plays, and people see you as a slave to whose services they are entitled and whom it is their enjoyment to criticize; for it is the privilege of masters to sit back and call forth helpful corrections while the slaves labor.
(...)
And if Lord Voldemort conquered Britain, he might then condescend to show himself noble in victory; and nobody would take his goodwill for granted, nor chirp corrections at him if his work was not to their liking. When he won, he would have true respect. I understood that day in the Ministry that by envying Dumbledore, I had shown myself as deluded as Dumbledore himself. I understood that I had been trying for the wrong place all along.

In some ways this plays into the thing people dislike about cannon Harry - where he’s too much of a reactionary - even though this is not about being active or proactive. It’s about having the expectation hung upon you that you would be the one to save them.

Needles to say, Tom decided to abort his original idea, which led to two things. Death of David Monroe, and his appreciation for the idea of Voldemort. Which leads us right to the prophesy and his reaction to it.

Spoiler

In retrospect, there were many obvious plans for destroying Dumbledore; but I think some part of me did not want to go back to playing solitaire instead of chess. It was when I had the prospect of creating another Tom Riddle to plot against, someone even more worthy than Dumbledore, that I was first willing to contemplate the end of my war. Yes, in retrospect that sounds stupid, but sometimes our emotions are more foolish than we can bring our reason to admit.

This is what lead to creation of Harry as he was, and the mistake that made Tom stranded for years. In any case, it is nearly stated outright, that Tom is going to kill Harry-Tom in the end, since he realises that playing against someone that might actually become dangerous, and has differing moral code is a violation to his ‘code’ (evil overlord list).

So yeah.



In conclusion.
The finale has a few fresh, surprising ideas, and a very beautiful wordplay between two smart people trying to outmaneuver each other, but it is built on critique of the wizarding world, and on assumption of stupidity.

I hate that to build an explanation that makes internal sense, a proverbial fortress of the epilogue and narration, the hill that was chosen was in fact the pile of the garbage dump. I will continue to read it, enjoy it and weep at the same time.

Still a 3.5/5, rounded down to 3/5.


p.s. as of the latest chapter Less Wrong has suggested that people write a solution to his puzzle. "How would Harry escape the current predicament?". A bad ending is promised if no one finds this (supposedly he knows at least one) solution, and a good ending would follow a solved puzzle. I have mixed feelings on this approach.

 

Nauro: You are taking Voldemort's words to be an accurate reflections of Yudkowsky's views. Which, well, is funny, given that Voldemort is very much the antagonist - and has some glaring flaws.

As for the gun... it has been made quite clear that their magics interact in extremely unfavorable ways, and Voldemort is incapable of casting magic on Harry without suffering debilitating consequences. Now.. the answer, of course, is that Voldemort is presumably fast enough to cast spells on his environment to attack Harry and then cancel all traces of his magic before they strike, but it's not a given.

 

Holy shit. I -

I honestly didn't even consider, even for a moment, that Voldemort might be wrong "in-universe" with his assessments of the Wizarding World, and my dislike colored the whole view of the claims he made.

Huh. So it's not "the Wizarding world is bad", but "Voldemort says wizarding world is bad"

I need to reread the last few chapters, and check which parts were parseltongue.