• MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    When you separate the art from the artist, you still have:

    • a slaveowner cop main character
    • an Asian named Ching Chong
    • slavery abolitionism as a joke
    • genetic superiority of certain characters (the bad guys were just wrong about which people are superior)
    • rampant fatphobia
    • Jewish goblin bankers
    • slaves who like being enslaved
    • slave heads decorated in Santa hats by the “good guys”
    • freeing slaves is bad because they become alcoholics
    • a black guy named MLK Shackles
    • a Jewish guy named Goldstein (I did not have to change this name to make the racism more clear)
    • none of the systemic issues that created the villain are ever addressed by the main characters beyond a surface level so nothing has actually been fixed, they’ve just delayed the takeover of society by fascists another generation or two
    • LifeOfChance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s not that deep. It’s a fantasy world that people can suspend themselves in and each person has their own self made story. If we start nitpicking which fantasy worlds have done something politically motivated we would be left with literally nothing to read/watch.

      JKR is an absolute cunt who has indeed damaged the image of the HP universe but for those who just care about that fantasy world because magic is cool that’s their get away from the hell that is real life.

      • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        If we start nitpicking which fantasy worlds have done something politically motivated we would be left with literally nothing to read/watch.

        The above criticism of Harry Potter is hardly nitpicking. When so much of a setting is stained by bigotry like that, it’s time to move on. Some fantasy worlds are better/worse than others. The HP world is clearly up there with the worst because of the myriad of hateful sterotypes.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

        • Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          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.

          • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            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.

            • Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              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.

              • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                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?

                • Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  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.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is why I said I don’t trust their opinions on media. This group lacks any media literacy and just looks for “roller coaster” type experiences. There’s so many better children’s/YA fantasy out there, many a direct response of HP, but to them, they’ll just be imitations to the sort of people who can’t read subtext.