#1 - The very existence of Hermione as a character, she's simple... annoying, and makes Harry complacent.

#2 - That's magic wasn't explored in deep in any way, shape or form. A mentor relationship of Albus and Harry would be the perfect situation to more information about magic, it's limits and possibilities... I'm just sad that nothing came from it.

#3 - Harry's character development, or the almost inexistence thereof. Harry had many, many opportunities to change, adopt a more proactive role, raise himself above his insecurities and limitations and become more than he was. Angsty has it's place and all, but dealing with all the shit life's throw in the way and changing to be better has too.

Yes, I know that Harry changed as a character, but really? Even in the final battle the dude was throwing Expelliarmus around in the face of Voldemort. Expelliarmus against the Killing Curse of Lord Snakefucking Voldemort.

#4 - Harry's disinterest about magic. Let's think a bit, dude grew up half-starved and hearing how he was useless and a waste of space, then, in a not very sunny day, Hagrid comes and tell him that he's a wizard. Now, a child that grew thinking that he wasn't anything too hot and special would seize the subject that made him special with his two hands, a prehensile dick (if he had any), a smile and the fervor of a madman. Harry didn't. He just said "cool", was fascinated by it and was perfectly happy being ordinary in his study habits. It strikes me as... farfetched, in the least.

#5 - Lord Voldemort. There's many ways to do a frankly terrifying and interesting villain. The book's way is not one of them.

#6 - Powerlevels and habilities fluctuating to the sway of the plot. Bellatrix dying by the hands of a housewife, teenagers can exchange spells with Inner Circle Death Eaters but an 200% fucking angry Harry Potter can't even touch Snape, Voldemort can outduel two professors and a senior auror, but can't nail Harry with a curse. It's just... unbelievable.

 

I think just the worst thing was how unexplained so many aspects of the magical world and magic itself were. For example, the trace was really confusing; was it placed on the person? If so how was what Dobby did picked up? And is magic even different for non-human magical being like house-elves?

Also the epilogue was absolute crap.

 

Speaking of stupid things that don't get explained, the Taboo was a total rabbit out of a hat.

 

Just because you hate the idea or don’t get it doesn’t mean they are wrong or doesn’t make sense as tonnes of people have already explained. “That’s just what their dynamic feels like it would lead to”, really (which I am still not sure what exactly is their dynamic from what you said)? How do you account for the fact there are plenty of real-life couples who are just like but have perfectly happy marriages that lasted for decades?

I have to agree here with Harry being too passive for his own good. Harry’s primary motivation for learning powerful spells like the Patronus is guess what… Quidditch. It seems that Harry cared about Quidditch far more than almost anything he encountered in the wizarding world. Otherwise, he sees learning magic almost as a chore at times.
In particular, in HBP the fact he allowed his chest monster to dictate his actions when he just heard about the prophecy a few months ago is rather unimpressive to say the least.

From what I know about the Trace is that it allows the Ministry to detect magic that is performed around underage witches/wizards but does not allow the Ministry to identify exactly who used the magic. This is why Harry was blamed for the Hovering Charm Dobby did because there was no other wizard living in Privet Drive. However the Weasley and other pure-blood children wouldn’t get into any trouble due to the presence of adult wizards around. It is rather discriminating against people living in Muggle homes.
Magic is different between house-elves and wizards. For example, house-elves could apparate in places that wizards cannot could they?

I agree, but I am guessing Rowling wrote it that way because like Remus said in Grimmauld Place, they were facing horrible Harry never expected before and considering almost the entire series is from Harry’s perspective it would come across as a surprise for him and for readers as well.

 

torrent56 Lexx had an entirely opinionated post. It was full of "I think this," or "I thought that..." They were just pointing out aspects of Harry Potter that, personally, didn't resonate with them. Your response is completely unwarranted and unnecessary. Just because you disagree, doesn't mean that you need to make a comment on how wrong they are for making their post. You're almost being as bad as the trolls on here who perpetuate bad fanon because you're seemingly always seeking to argue.

Please, chill out. Instead of responding to what everyone says with explicit approval or disapproval, be a little more subtle and less confrontational. Put your opinion out there if it isn't already or if there is something relevant to add, if not, utilise the thumbs up button to support posts that you would have made but were beaten to.

The point Nyx was making was that if magic is different between House elves and humans, as supported by canon, then why does Dobby's levitation charm register as Harry's on the trace? Because as it stands it makes no sense for it to be on Harry's wand or person, refer to the same Dobby example. Therefore, the whole situation is confusing and lacks a satisfactory explanation.

Like I've said in previous posts you don't find the contention or underlying point that people are making. Either you're being deliberately obtuse or you're young and having difficulty with reading comprehension. Either way try to spend more time attempting to understand what people are putting forth before responding in kind.

 

The Trace is a plot device who's sole purpose is to create conflict. It was not handled with any kind of consistency, and trying to make sense of it will just frustrate you.

 

Atram Noctem - I agree, some of the magic within the HP series just doesn’t make sense. I feel it’s also a way to show how unfair the Ministry is towards Muggle-borns and those who don’t stay at wizards’ house as well.

I was only trying to explain what the books tell us in a way that I hope would be understandable to everyone sigh.
The explanation then is clear. The Ministry detects magic around underage wizards regardless of whether it is human or elven magic. Its power is rather limited in that the Ministry has no clue what form of magic is used only that it happened around an underage wizard; it is even explained as such in chapter 17 of HBP. Now as to why nobody could differentiate human and elven magic, I believe the answer is that they are both doing magic although at different levels (e.g. house elves can apparate more easily than wizards) but the magic itself is exactly the same.

For the post in question I pointed the reason why I think Lexx‘s reasoning was wrong (that there are lots of real-life couples who are just like that which has nothing to do with interpretations) rather bluntly. I suppose you want nobody to disagree but when there is disagreement do not use the phrases like “I disagree” or “it’s wrong”? What if someone says they think Voldemort should win the war?

Yes that is what I have been doing thanks. When I agreed with someone, I wouldn’t ever just make a post regurgitating what they said but also added my comments there what is the problem you’re having here I don’t get it? When I disagree, I gave my reasons for it (they are blunt yes, but are they any more than yours – I suggest you read your first post in the other thread we clashed). Could you show me the forum rule I broke please from being blunt? If I did unintentionally, I am sorry and I will change.

On the other hand, for someone who calls me belligerent before, you sure are not holding back ad hominem arguments. “Either you're being deliberately obtuse or you're young and having difficulty with reading comprehension”, right. In case you don’t know, misunderstandings can occur quite often in real life in places like the work offices, schools, universities, homes, parliaments etc. and that is even with the help of facial expressions and body language which unfortunately we do not have on this forum. Not all of them have reading difficulties or are being obtuse. All that normally needs to happen is for the first person to explain what their actual meanings are and then the respondent could amend his response accordingly. Don't need to get emotional here.


Lol I am almost as bad as the trolls right and always seeking to argue (I guess the posts where I tried to explain things or generally agree with other don't count?)? Then what are you doing keeping track of what I was doing/saying and about three quarters of your post are aimed directly at me? I always want to argue ok why is it on another thread you couldn’t accept that other people have different views of the end of chapter 15 in DH and it is not black and white but grey where nobody behaved perfectly and defend it?

I would prefer to focus on HP contents in my post unlike most of your posts to me so far so could we just move on you know?

 

torrent56

I think the issue here is...this is an opinion based question. It's not an argument over facts in the series, it's about what people didn't like in a fictional creation. Opinions like that are not something that can be logically argued based on facts and reason. They simply refer to the enjoyment or dislike of a thing. You can't argue someone into liking someone.

I hate mashed potatoes. Argue me into liking them with facts and reason. It doesn't work.

 

JK did a great job with the iceberg worldbuilding technique, but I'll never get over her handling of Harry and Voldemort.

Harry's main problem is that he's too passive. Voldemort's problem is that he's cartoonishly flat. Usually an author can either give us a cool protag or deliver on The Villain Problem. I can't help being disappointed that the message of the books remained "love and friendship conquer evil" even after the shift into YA.

 

Why do you think Rowling wrote such a passive protagonist?

Why was Voldemort so flat?

Your thoughts on why she wrote her two most important characters that way?

 

I'll go out on a limb and guess that she's just not good at some aspects of writing while nailing others. I doubt she set out to write Harry passive and Voldemort cartoonish, but they came out that way.

TLDR; I have no fucking idea

 

The fact that we only saw glimpses of what made Dumbledore and Voldemort so special. These characters are talked about as if they are gods and yet we rarely see what that actually means. Especially Voldemort, at least Dumbledore had a couple of good scenes.

 

Voldemort is an incredibly disappointing villain.

 

While we're whining about Voldemort, he seems to occupy this strange middle ground where he's too vicious for the good guys to tolerate, but also not vicious enough to be really effective. Considering how dependent Harry and his friends were on the kindness of strangers in Deathly Hallows, I think they'd have probably lost if he'd just killed all the Weasleys after taking over the Ministry. It's not like he didn't have ample pretext anyways.

And one other major thing about Voldemort, that being how arbitrary his connection to Harry is in the last two books. In HBP, Dumbledore says that Voldemort realized how dangerous his connection is after being ejected by Harry's love at the Ministry, and so he'll use Occlumency to block it out from now on. Fair enough. But come Deathly Hallows, he's no longer bothering for no apparent reason. What makes this insane is that he's looking for the Elder Wand to use as a secret weapon against Harry, so he has more reason than ever not to want to give away any hints about what he's up to. If he'd been as diligent as he apparently was the year before, he would probably have successfully kept that a secret and won in the long run, since the Malfoy Manor detour would be skipped and the Trio wouldn't find the cup. Voldemort doesn't just make a lot of mistakes, but he always seems to make just the right mistake to ruin everything.

 

Ya know, I could totally see a President Riddle if Tom had been borne in the MACUSA

 

Nah, he's not nearly bloodthirsty enough for American politics.

 

Perhaps...but in the end...

Cofveve

 

...You misspelled 'covfefe'.

 

Typo. My bad

 

I hated how we didn't get an accurate read on Dumbledore, or though it did seem to help fanfic a lot. We never really knew if he was a master manipulator that had planned all the moves out in advance, or if he was just a guy stuck between a rock and a hard place trying to do the best he could. In the first book alone there are incredible coincidences that may or may not have been power plays by Dumbledore, Hagrid taking Harry to Gringrotts and getting the stone, Harry's detention in the Forbidden Forest etc etc. I was really hoping we would get more about Dumbledores younger self in Fantastic Beasts.