Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Tavern of the Rising Sun > Thread: Harry Potter - Cynical insight
Thread: Harry Potter - Cynical insight This thread is 12 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 · «PREV / NEXT»
Lexxan
Lexxan


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
posted April 12, 2009 10:23 PM

I still don't like Snape. He reminds me too much of an eel... or something slimy. Bah, he still was nasty, eventhough he loved Lily Evans.

Albus Severus Potter... dammit, the lad must really hate his parents for this...
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted April 12, 2009 10:24 PM

I knew that Snape was on Harry's side all along. But the way it was justified (he like Lily?!) was lame and fanficish.

And I'd liked to have seen Lupin have more screen time. Severely underrated character, IMO.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lexxan
Lexxan


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
posted April 12, 2009 10:28 PM
Edited by Lexxan at 22:41, 12 Apr 2009.

SPOILER AHEAD

Lupin was cool... Pity he died.

Tonks was great too...

Fred, Tonks, Lupin, Cedric Diggory, Dumbledore, Sirius... why did all of my fav characters die? I'm glad Rowling didn't touch Luna or Hermione. Those two really pwned the hell out of everyone else.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Elvin
Elvin


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
What if Elvin was female?
posted April 12, 2009 10:35 PM

So much for a spoiler warning.. Please be more careful guys.
____________
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
lucky_dwarf
lucky_dwarf


Promising
Supreme Hero
Visiting
posted April 12, 2009 10:37 PM

fred+george= FUN EVIL FUN!!!

My favorite part was when Umbridge took over and the mayhem starts
All those fire works + a swamp a few weeks later

____________
So much has changed in my absence.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lexxan
Lexxan


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
posted April 12, 2009 10:45 PM

Yep, one of my favourite Scenes.

As a matter of fact I've actually have met a Hag like Dolores Umbridge in RL - she was my Class's Tutor AND my French/Spanish teacher. In my last year, she retired (probably forced so by her colleagues), and I was glad, because I knew that the generations after me wouldn't suffer her presence anymore. She was a truly... well, you get the idea.

No-brainer that Umbridge was my least-favourite Character in the Book... I sometimes wish she was real AND standing before me, so I could punch her in the face and yell "IN YOUR FACE, *****, THIS MUGGLE JUST OWNED YE!"

Ah, fantasy
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted April 12, 2009 11:06 PM

I've had teachers like Umbridge. But I was never much of a fan of Sirius. "Hey, Harry. Go and try to get yourself killed."
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
phoenixreborn
phoenixreborn


Promising
Legendary Hero
Unicorn
posted April 12, 2009 11:07 PM

The ugly side of Lexxan comes out.
____________
Bask in the light of my glorious shining unicorn.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elvin
Elvin


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
What if Elvin was female?
posted April 12, 2009 11:09 PM
Edited by Elvin at 23:10, 12 Apr 2009.

Not exactly. He was of the morality if you don't take risks and always play it safe you are already dead inside. But he also had the skill and character strength to pull it off, he wasn't clueless.

Quote:
The ugly side of Lexxan comes out.

Is it that time already?
____________
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
lucky_dwarf
lucky_dwarf


Promising
Supreme Hero
Visiting
posted April 12, 2009 11:11 PM

Quote:
Yep, one of my favourite Scenes.

As a matter of fact I've actually have met a Hag like Dolores Umbridge in RL - she was my Class's Tutor AND my French/Spanish teacher. In my last year, she retired (probably forced so by her colleagues), and I was glad, because I knew that the generations after me wouldn't suffer her presence anymore. She was a truly... well, you get the idea.

No-brainer that Umbridge was my least-favourite Character in the Book... I sometimes wish she was real AND standing before me, so I could punch her in the face and yell "IN YOUR FACE, *****, THIS MUGGLE JUST OWNED YE!"

Ah, fantasy


i know right? And the movie Umbridge and book Umbridge look nothing alike! i would have imagined her like aunt marge only that she had long blonde silky hair ,no neck, and allot more frilly cufs
____________
So much has changed in my absence.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted April 12, 2009 11:15 PM

Meh, I still don't like Sirius. Too much of a risk-taker.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lexxan
Lexxan


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
posted April 12, 2009 11:20 PM

Well to put is short:

Liked Characters: Hermione, Luna, Ron, Fred, George, Lupin, Tonks, Mrs Weasley, Voldemort, McGonagall, Dumbledore, Fleur Delacour, Ginny

Disliked Characters: Umbridge, Snape, Malfoy, Percy, Seamus Finnigan, Dean Thomas, Zacharias Smith, Fudge, Scrimgeour, Bellatrix, Cormac McLaggen.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Elvin
Elvin


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
What if Elvin was female?
posted April 12, 2009 11:29 PM

McGonagall was the kind of person you could respect and trust but she had a distant approach. That is not to say I did not like her but wasn't the type you could feel very close to.
____________
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lexxan
Lexxan


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
posted April 12, 2009 11:31 PM

Yes, I liked her Dignity and loyalty. She's just a character I would respect in RL as well.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
baklava
baklava


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
posted April 12, 2009 11:57 PM

Quote:
Fred, Tonks, Lupin, Cedric Diggory, Dumbledore, Sirius... why did all of my fav characters die?

Cause Rowling didn't have anyone left to hook them up with.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted April 13, 2009 12:06 AM

What about Lupin/Tonks?
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
lucky_dwarf
lucky_dwarf


Promising
Supreme Hero
Visiting
posted April 13, 2009 12:38 AM

they died its irelevant
____________
So much has changed in my absence.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
rti
rti


Adventuring Hero
Now known as Rarensu
posted April 13, 2009 10:51 AM
Edited by rti at 10:59, 13 Apr 2009.

On Harry Potter Magic Theory (Or Lack, Thereof)
In my opinion, the laws of magic are probably the most important thing in any fantasy universe. Life is a game, and all games have rules. The winner is always the one who best understands how to use the rules for his own benefit. If magic has no laws, then there can be no conflict: one combatant simply wishes the other out of existence.
An example of a well-developed magic theory is Christopher Paolini's Inheritance Cycle (AKA Eragon). There are rules which state the powers and limitations of the magic, an explanation of the origins of magical energy, and precisely defined methods of transforming a desire into a reality.
JK Rowling's Harry Potter is an example of a poorly developed magic theory. There are very few rules governing the powers and limitations of magic; the few that exist were added in as afterthought during the final book. There is no explanation whatsoever of the origins of magical energy; we are only given the hint that the ability to control this energy is primarily genetic, but not always so. Finally, the method of transforming desire into reality is very poorly defined. Rowling creates a "list" of pseudo-Latin phrases, but no explanation of the grammar used to generate them. She insists that Wizards must use wands, but never explains why and frequently makes exceptions anyway. In addition, there are a number of spell examples which fall well outside the established pattern: teleportation, mental attacks, magical substances, and abilities of certain non-humans. It would be doing a great honor to call these examples "contradictory", for that implies that there was at least a false logic at work. Finally, there are a number of spells which should exist, given the pattern of spells already present, but don't. Rowling's magic theory is less intellectually stimulating than a plank of wood.
In addition, Rowling's magic theory play absolutely no role in the plot, character development, or any theme or motif. In fact, I argue that it only exists as a result of pressure from fans, not because Rowling believes that it belongs. This shows that JK Rowling does not see the world in terms of logic or natural law or cause-and-effect. In her mind, things are the way they are because that's the way they are, not for any particular reason. When things change, the changes are unpredictable. The result is a fictional universe that appears chaotic and mysterious, because that's the way she sees our universe. If she had a more logical mind, she would write more logical stories.

On The Misuse of Plot Devices
One of the best-written works in history, in terms of proper use of plot devices, is Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes Mystery Novels. In the beginning of each story, all the necessary evidence to solve the mystery is already present. Holmes, via use of deductive reasoning, follows each clue to its source. Each step in the plot can be logically predicted using only previous knowledge. That is to say, there are no "plot holes". Information does not magically appear, it is discovered after Holmes decides that is must exist and then figures out where to find it.
I believe that all stories should be written so that this principal can apply. Each story is allowed one plot-hole in the beginning, to explain why how the protagonist was chosen for his role, and one at the climax, if the author wishes to show that the protagonist only triumphed by accident, and that is was very unlikely. However, all other plot-holes should be banned. Note that it is not necessary that all of the plot-related information must be revealed in the beginning to the reader, as is the case with Sherlock Holmes. However, the plot information must exist in the mind of the author beforehand. Otherwise, the plot feels as though it is simply wandering around aimlessly and resolves for no particular reason. Proper use of plot devices creates a plot with a sense of purpose and direction. When the plot devices are revealed in the end, it should be obvious that the chain of events was not random, it was a logical progression from start to finish.
Rowling's Harry Potter series is an example of a piece riddled with plot holes. It does not have a sense of direction, and when all is revealed in the end there are too many independent variables. I will leave Doomforge to point out the bulk of these, and be content.

On The Monetary Success of JK Rowling
One of the most important lessons that any businessman must learn is that supply does not, in fact, create demand. Only companies that are selling something that the market wants will survive. Businessmen cannot force the customer to want something simply because he should, nor can he force the customer to stop buying products that they do want.
Many people believe that only good books should sell big (I am one of them), but this is not, in fact, the reality. There are over 3 billion people with below-average intelligence, and they are eager to buy books which are simple enough for them to understand. Rowling's Harry Potter series is exactly the sort of thing which appeals to this audience. It has no logic, instead using irrational constructions which are at home in an irrational mind. What the customer wants, the customer will get. Rowling cannot be blamed for taking advantage of this market opportunity any more than OPEQ can be blamed for selling oil to the Chinese.
This is, as above stated, not my preferred reality. In an ideal world, there are no stupid people and so books are all written for an intelligent audience. However, slaughtering a billion people is unpalatable and genetic engineering walks a very fine line. For the time being, we must accept the fact that stupid books sell bigger because stupid people breed faster.

On Time Travel and Paradox
There are essentially two ways to think about time travel. The first is the naive idea that if you time travel you are changing the timeline. Shooting your father will be my classic example. Suppose a teenager wants to commit an unusual suicide-murder, and time travels to before he was conceived, and shoots his father. The timeline becomes different, so that the teenager was never born. In this new timeline, the teenager never goes back to shoot his father, because he was never born. So the father never gets shot, and successfully impregnates the teenager's mother. However, the newly re-created teenager then goes back to kill his father, but then at the same time he can't because he succeeded... Ad Infinatum. It's a Paradox. It is impossible to decide whether or not the teenager's father was shot.
The other way to think about time travel to refuse to believe that Time Travel can change the timeline, for the simple reason that the timeline already has all the time traveling factored into it. When you attempt to change something, you are only reinforcing the timeline by completing your destiny. For example, if the teenager went back to shoot his father, but failed, and instead made his father angry enough to mistreat the teenager enough that the teenager would attempt to shoot his father but fail, then the timeline is preserved and no paradox occurs. The difference between the two time travel theories is summed up by Steven Hawking in his Chronology Protection Conjecture, which states that some natural law must exist to prevent the creation of paradoxical time-loops.
Amazingly, JK Rowling is smart enough to realize this and so all of her time-traveling adventures resolve themselves without paradox.
____________
Sincerely,
A Proponent of Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, and Courtesy.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted April 13, 2009 11:03 AM

Excellent post RTI

This one in particular:

Quote:
This shows that JK Rowling does not see the world in terms of logic or natural law or cause-and-effect. In her mind, things are the way they are because that's the way they are, not for any particular reason. When things change, the changes are unpredictable. The result is a fictional universe that appears chaotic and mysterious, because that's the way she sees our universe. If she had a more logical mind, she would write more logical stories.


is what sums up my rant very well. The good writer and the bad writer, as I always say. The bad writer is just how you described. The good writer doesn't create the plot "because he wanted it to be like that", but also, takes the created world and the laws into consideration, and alters either the world, or the plot, to avoid nonsense. While Rowling is gifted at the art of writing, she doesn't really care for that rule.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elvin
Elvin


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
What if Elvin was female?
posted April 13, 2009 12:19 PM

Very good post. However I don't attribute Rowling's success to 'idiotic people' rather than a vast teen fanbase that cares little for story flaws and just wants to enjoy the book - it's better that they have a motive to read than watch tv and they were not likely to read something more complex at this age. After all many of us have read Goosebumps as kids right?
____________
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 12 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0665 seconds