Anything about Harry Potter that always annoyed you?

Okay so I'm trying to deconstruct/reconstruct Harry Potter. So anyone have any pet peeves with the series?

The worldbuilding. It looks nice if you don't look that closely, but there's a lot of Fridge Logic. For instance, the deal with the Philosopher's Stone—if it's apparently common knowledge that Nicolas Flamel has something that lets him live forever, why isn't there more of an uproar (over ethical issues) about it?

The Time Turners. It's very powerful and dangerous magic, but they let a 13 year old use it for something as mundane as getting to and from classes?

It always bothered me that Slytherin was the designated house for evil people, while all the other three houses were just designated for types of personalities.

edited 14th Jun '11 10:07:31 PM by annebeeche

The wandlore in the seventh book felt like a giant Deus ex Machina. Imagine how complicated things would be after all the disarming spells in the first six books.

Actually, I didn't feel that way since wandlore was almost exactly how I imagined the wands worked anyway.

And how come Hogwarts doesen't teach English or Math, math would help with potions at the very least?

^^ It wasn't hinted at in the earlier books, so I just kind of went like, "wut"

I'm not talking about the thing with the twin cores, though.

And also "It's are choices that make us who we are... unless your Tom in which case your evil from birth" I mean seriously if you want us to think Harry and Voldermort are Not So Different how about not making 11 year old Riddle so obviously evil.

I don't think his disturbing 11 year old behavior made him seem "evil from birth", a lot of things could have happened in that 11 years since he was born. It's plausible that all the other orphanage kids bullied him all the time, like with Harry, and he naturally lashed out in the only way he knew how. It probably started out with him accidentally doing things, like Harry with the snake in the zoo, and then he figured out he somehow could make bad things happen.

Now, what I think you're getting at is Word of God(? I recall JKR saying this but I don't have a source) saying that Tom was destined to be evil because of Merope's choices. I don't think that's really fair.

edited 14th Jun '11 10:24:52 PM by melloncollie

Good point, although a bit of of subtlty would have been nice. Is it me or does Harry Potter seem to think that personaility is set in stone by eleven?

I seem to recall Dumbledore expressing the possibility that it would be better if they sorted later.

Of course, the context in which he said it just adds fuel to the "Slytherins are evil" thing Rowling's got going on, which is...eh.

^^ Not really, Hermione's personality changed, Ron's changed some, Neville's changed a lot, Malfoy's changed as well. I don't really know what to say about Harry's though.

^ The Slytherins are evil thing did bother me a lot, but IMO it's subverted subtly in the last book. The Slytherins don't fight against Voldy in large numbers but I don't think they fought against Hogwarts either. Regulus Black, Slughorn and Snape also turned out heroic (YMMV).

edited 14th Jun '11 10:57:44 PM by melloncollie

The house system always seemed stupid to me.

^^ Discounting Slughorn, who I don't think was supposed to be seen as heroic (though I do have some fondness for him), Snape was taken care of by the aforementioned Dumbledore comment: "Aww, Severus, you're all right after all. Hell, maybe you would've been in Gryffindor anyways!"

...Yeah.

Regulus is your best example, but he's also the one who gets the least screen time. By which I mean, he gets no screen time.

I'll admit, it's not a clear cut Always Chaotic Evil Slytherin. It's just uncomfortably close.

edited 14th Jun '11 11:01:51 PM by Chubert

Slughorn was unlikable in the 6th book, but in the end he chose to stand up to Voldy and Co., that's pretty heroic.

... wait. This was actually said?

gaaaaaaaaaaah way to go Rowling.

@ Zolnier: I think the funniest part was that one Sorting Hat song where the gist of it was that Gryffindors are brave, Slytherins are ambitious, Ravenclaws are smart, and Hufflepuffs are everybody else. Come on, you couldn't think of something good to say about Hufflepuffs?

edited 14th Jun '11 11:07:32 PM by melloncollie

It was strongly, heavily implied. Note the aforementioned, "Maybe we sort too soon" comment. After a conversation when Severus' bravery is examined, Dumbledore pulls that out.

I love the whole "the Houses have an us versus them mentality and stereotype each over" This would stop if they got rid of the system.

The fact that they don't teach any normal subjects. No Maths, English, Science, no languages, no geography, no arts. They just teach these uneducated children incredibly powerful magical abilities, and then let them loose on the world.

The ridiculous extent to which nobody knows anything about the Muggle world. It's treated as though wizards never have any kind of interaction with Muggles, ever, despite the fact that some of them live in areas where they're the only magical residents.

And the 'technology doesn't work at Hogwarts' thing. I hate that. It's ridiculous.

Invisibility cloaks are a big deal. Even if yours is not the super one, it's still freaking expensive.

Then in the next book Arthur Wesley has a whole fucking car with a cloaking mechanism. Which yes, stopped working, but still. Arthur was never supposed to be a genius wizard, as far as I remember.

Also, when Slytherin gets passwords like "pure blood" and it's dorm is decorated with skulls, is it any wonder that people in there turn evil?

And yes, Voldemort seems to be pretty much born evil. "But he was at an orphanage! Everyone knows that orphans have a high chance of turning evil!"

Edit: Also, time machines. The death eaters have infiltrated the ministry, but they don't steal a single time machine. Obviously Voldemort can't see any potential uses for it.

edited 15th Jun '11 3:13:30 AM by Dealan

The magic-inhibits-electricity thing made sense to me, but I wish it had been explored in more detail.

Actually, that's a general complaint. Things are seldom explored unless they directly affect the plot. Apparently Dumbledore's gay, but there's nothing in canon that could tell you that if you didn't know already.

Apart from that, yeah, all (or nearly all) Slytherins being evil, and the fact that Hogwarts doesn't teach Muggle subjects.

You know, you can just look up the Headscratchers page. That has more than enough complaintments and arguments to make a Neon Genesis Evangelion out of the series. It's bloody long, though, probably one of the, if not THE, longest ones in the history of this site.

I hated the fact that Muggles were pretty much completely useless , and Wizards were just unanimously better. Rowling even says that you need to be magical to use POTIONS for gods sake. What's the point in Harry trying to protect muggles when we never get a chance to be awesome in this series. It seems demeaning and patronizing. Someone should have fired a gun at a Death Eater and killed him/her at some point IMO, it would've at least been a cool moment when Voldermort realizes that these inferior creatures brought down a mighty wizard. I know I would have fist-pumped the air.

Okay so twenty five percent of Hogwarts students are muggle borns... how can r\wizarding society be so ignorant of muggles. Many of them had at least on muggle parent.

In more personal note, I was quite disappointed in that Voldemort never got any physical damage. *sighs* I think the series would have been more awesome (not quite logical, but) if Harry punched Voldy in the face at least once.

Also, yeah, it really would have been really awesome if Filch and Hagrid arrived at the fight, armed with AK 47 and minigun respectively. Can you say "CRRRRRRRYYYY SSUM MOOOOOOOOAAAAAAARRRRRRR!!!!!!"?

And JK's going on and on about how Slytherin is not defined by pure blood, it's their fucking password.