How well do you think that Harry Potter has aged? (Spoilers)

[Nobody700]

That part of the problem, if they are slaves it likely they did spend there entire life being told this is normal, so are they really happy, or doing the only thing they ever knew too do.

Which is the really problematic sentiment in real life. Because if your argument that people are brainwashed because they don't see your point, you're falling into the White Savior narrative.

And does need to be called out.

"No, they just don't agree with you."

ANNNNDD I do this fully acknowledging that the House elves are NOT real and Rowling may just be a bad writer here.

Like I said, I don't think she wrote it very well even if she did want to call out RL activist racism.

I think the main problem of the whole slavery situation is this is a grander problem with JK Rowling, where she will take a problem, bring it up... and ignore it. She thinks the status quo of Harry Potter, before Voldemort, was good. But it wasn't, it was bad. But than the cast... ignore that and repeat the old situation. Which, given this isn't based on the real world, is hard to justify.

[CharlesPhipps]

I think the main problem of the whole slavery situation is this is a grander problem with JK Rowling, where she will take a problem, bring it up... and ignore it. She thinks the status quo of Harry Potter, before Voldemort, was good. But it wasn't, it was bad. But than the cast... ignore that and repeat the old situation. Which, given this isn't based on the real world, is hard to justify.

I think Rowling thinks the "radical reform" the HP universe needed was "getting the Nazis out of the government." Which...yes, is an improvement but if you believe in systemic flaws then obviously means this is going to happen again.

I mean, the Malfoys have been involved in TWO Nazi revolts.

[stryke]

That would make a little sense if Hermione was rich and lazy, which she isn't. I mean her parents are dentists, not millionaires.

You're missing my point. She's acting like the trope, not that she literally is the trope in every possible detail. That's what Rowling is clearly mocking if you know it, or at least that's what her intent is I believe, the actual result of what that translates to on the page... yeah more questionable as mentioned. If you've seen the trope before, and believe me this thing was everywhere from sitcoms, to other books, to radio comedies that I'm not at all surprised Rowling decided to use it for a subplot cause it must have seemed to be an easy way to make one of her character's annoying in a seen to be fun/harmless way to cause some conflict/character growth. The badges especially was such a thing that it's such a giveaway to me what Rowling is doing here. What it resulted in though as has been noted so often is significantly more ugly and messed up.

She thinks the status quo of Harry Potter, before Voldemort, was good.

Does she? To me it's an obvious pastiche of UK society but with added wizards and witches. All the bad people who cause all the problems are upper class rich people like the Malfoys, the Weaslies are poor so they're sympathetic, and Umbridge is so tory coded it's amazing she doesn't turn up with a 'I heart Thatcher' mug on her desk. She's not the best at world building so yeah she basically took the UK as is, with all the flaws that go with that, which we know before Rowling went insane that she's really not a fan of, added some magic to make it appealing to the kids, and called it done.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

I mean, Rowling *writes* a world with inequalities in it, but doesnt' seem to really have any interest in tackling the causes of those inequalities or challenging the status quo of them. It's a classic Liberal failure of imagination.

[Nobody700]

I think the main problem of the whole slavery situation is this is a grander problem with JK Rowling, where she will take a problem, bring it up... and ignore it. She thinks the status quo of Harry Potter, before Voldemort, was good. But it wasn't, it was bad. But than the cast... ignore that and repeat the old situation. Which, given this isn't based on the real world, is hard to justify.

I think Rowling thinks the "radical reform" the HP universe needed was "getting the Nazis out of the government." Which...yes, is an improvement but if you believe in systemic flaws then obviously means this is going to happen again.

I mean, the Malfoys have been involved in TWO Nazi revolts.

Maybe this does go into my dislike of how JK Rowling has... really REALLY gone downhill, so I'll be fair to her. Is it wrong of her to not show Harry Potter ending everything bad ever? No. Is it wrong of her to not have a scene where the government is called out for basically allowing this to have happened and not stopping it, because they became complacent and even downright COMPLICIT with such a force? I argue, for an adult series, yes. For a childrens, no. Rowling is not at fault for that. What she IS at fault for, is showing this society is wrong and corrupt even before Dumbledore comes in, abuse and betray other magical beings and is pro slavery and has a strong belief of muggle born wizards being 'mud blood' and trying to hide all evidence of Voldemort's return... and kinda gets away scot free. Rowling kind of betrays the ideas of progress, because progress is not this line and that's it. It's going forward more and more.

I also admit that as someone who is not a big Potter person, it's hard to give my 100% in this. Just... man these books aged badly.

[CharlesPhipps]

I mean, Rowling *writes* a world with inequalities in it, but doesnt' seem to really have any interest in tackling the causes of those inequalities or challenging the status quo of them. It's a classic Liberal failure of imagination.

I think the idea that she HAS to tackle them is an attitude that might be to her credit. When the real life UK gets rid of said inequalities, maybe her books should reflect that. But they haven't so they don't. Suddenly saying, "All of the Wizard families stopped being capitalist and racism was outlawed" feels like it wouldn't fit the setting as described.

[CharlesPhipps]

I think you can't call Dumbledore pro slavery.

He flat out offers wages to all of the House Elves and other actions.

Now you can argue it's Pro-Slavery that they TURN IT DOWN (because the House Elves are not capitalist and in fact disgusted by the prospect) but it doesn't reflect on dumbeldore.

[Nobody700]

That would make a little sense if Hermione was rich and lazy, which she isn't. I mean her parents are dentists, not millionaires.

You're missing my point. She's acting like the trope, not that she literally is the trope in every possible detail. That's what Rowling is clearly mocking if you know it, or at least that's what her intent is I believe, the actual result of what that translates to on the page... yeah more questionable as mentioned. If you've seen the trope before, and believe me this thing was everywhere from sitcoms, to other books, to radio comedies that I'm not at all surprised Rowling decided to use it for a subplot cause it must have seemed to be an easy way to make one of her character's annoying in a seen to be fun/harmless way to cause some conflict/character growth. The badges especially was such a thing that it's such a giveaway to me what Rowling is doing here. What it resulted in though as has been noted so often is significantly more ugly and messed up.

She thinks the status quo of Harry Potter, before Voldemort, was good.

Does she? To me it's an obvious pastiche of UK society but with added wizards and witches. All the bad people who cause all the problems are upper class rich people like the Malfoys, the Weaslies are poor so they're sympathetic, and Umbridge is so tory coded it's amazing she doesn't turn up with a 'I heart Thatcher' mug on her desk. She's not the best at world building so yeah she basically took the UK as is, with all the flaws that go with that, which we know before Rowling went insane that she's really not a fan of, added some magic to make it appealing to the kids, and called it done.

Really this situation is badly presented. I GET what Rowling was going for, but three MAJOR problems.

1. Hermoine IS a minority in this world. As a muggle born wizard, she is considered 'mud blood' by many, and has actual wizard nazis want her dead just for being born. To you and I, she's just your standard white girl (Yeah not buying the black, JK), but in this world, she IS a minority, and a rather despised one. Does Hermoine face much prejudice in these stories? Not too much, but it does exist and is made clear that if Voldemort wins, people like Hermoine are on the chopping block FAST.
2. Dobby and the elves are SLAVES, no ifs and or buts. The book can pretend they aren't, but death of the author exists for a reason. Dobby is a slave, and hates it. The elves don't hate being slaves... because JK says they aren't. If they were PAID SERVANTS, and Hermoine pulled this, you can see she's in the wrong. But instead, it comes off she's the only sane woman in a world that likes to pretend that this is cool. Hermoine even being told Dobby is special is just bull, because how is 'wanting to be free' a quirk? Are the elves just... into extreme bondage? Why are they slaves and why is this fine? Please, explain that JK!
3. JK was, before she turned nuts, probably all against this, but not strongly. JK knows that the upper elite controlling stuff is bad (before she decided that was cool but I'm being fair to her), yet she doesn't go into why. It comes off as less 'this society is corrupt' and more just 'bad actors' which happens a lot in media like this.

[Thebestoftherest]

[Thebestoftherest]

This makes good point, counter?