this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
1116 points (88.8% liked)
Microblog Memes
5699 readers
3125 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem isn't that the world of Harry Potter is politically motivated. The problem is that it's racist, transphobic, fatphobic, misogynist, and it's centrally designed to accommodate a political philosophy of systemic inaction even as it directly and clearly shows us systemic problems that are never solved.
The first book was good, but after that point the books keep getting more mature and discussing bigger issues, while also refusing to have the protagonists do anything to help these issues on a permanent basis, even though some of them try! Hermione tries to abolish slavery and the author has to intervene to say no. Harry Potter is trying to be a complex and political story for big kids, and it promises political payoff to the political story arcs, but it consistently fails to deliver.
By the time of book 4 or so, the fantasy of Harry Potter is an imaginary world where nearly everyone sucks and nothing about the world or society ever gets better over time. That's a depressing AF fantasy. People get stuck reliving the whimsy and delight of the first two books and don't see that Harry Potter has become grimdark. They don't see the art for what it is.
Racist I can see, but where did the other -ist and -ics come in to the story? Fatphobic? Are you talking about the part where his cousin just starts eating someone else's birthday cake with his hands and gets magiked with a pig's tail? Genuinely curious here, idk any of the hot garbage takes from Rowling herself since I never made and will never make a Twitter.
In book 4, Dudley is trying to lose weight. The narration says he's "the size of a baby whale", and constantly mocks him. Harry taunts him with food, and the Weasley twins give him magic candy that causes his tongue to swell to the size of an anaconda. Thing is, Dudley doesn't actually do anything mean to Harry in this book. This treatment is retribution for abuse that happened years ago, and Dudley was and is a child.
The narration constantly insults women characters by calling them fat, saying they have "mannish hands", and pointing out masculine facial features. When Rowling doesn't like a woman, she calls her fat or masculine. In Harry Potter, moral failings are usually accompanied by failure to embody femininity.
Oh yeah. He did work on loosing weight. I really liked his redemtion arc and character by the end of the books. Yeah, that was retribution from children to children. Felt very "Lord of the Flies" esque when I was reading it. I wouldn't call that fatphobia myself, but I understand your perspective better. Thanks for the quick response.
The thing is, you have to make some sort of distinction between what Harry thinks, and what Rowling as the narrator says. The narration is always going on about how bad women have "mannish hands". Is Harry a raging misogynist in his private thoughts, or is this the voice of the author? And if this is the voice of the author, why is Rowling making fun of childhood obesity? Why is Rowling joining in Harry's abuse of Dudley? I can understand Harry being mean to Dudley, he has a pretty decent motivation. Rowling is a grown adult and was not abused by the Dursleys, so why is she so mean-spirited to her own character? Why is she saying he's the size of a baby whale?
Yes. I'd just guess that the answer I interpret from those questions and what you interpret are different in a few ways. Understanding insensitivities that were baked into older media is valuable, and why I try to understand people's criticism better. But just like Bill Gates giving to charity doesn't make him a good person, having biases show up in a fictional novel doesn't negate the moral lessons and the escapism it can offer. You seem to have a very strong opinion on the topic, and I have learned more from hearing your perspective. Thank you.