Harry Potter

I think the Putter-Outer is one, too. Although that was a bit of a stretch.

Edited by Redmess on Oct 4th 2018 at 2:01:56 PM

The Deluminator wasn't really significant in its first appearance or function, but rather made significant by Dumby specifically for Ron's benefit.

Oh yeah, and that's also discounting the Golden Snitch, in the same vein as the Deluminator, though with the Flesh Memory function being added in and being used to contain the Zombie Ring.

Edited by Rytex on Oct 5th 2018 at 11:35:29 AM

It's still listed as a Chekov's Gun on the page for that trope, though. Harry Potter has an entire sub page to its own, actually.

It almost literally, has enough guns to fill a standard armory.

Thing about a Chekhov's gun is that it needed to be planted first. It can't go off unless it's been planted.

We needed some indication that people can be cursed to eventually become creatures. And off-handed question from Hermione or Ron in regards to Centaurs could have filled the role easily enough. Or a boring dialogue at the beginning of a class before the lesson is interupted. Something that we can follow the thread from Point A to Point B.

But its just not there.

I mean, the ides of an Obscurial/Obscurus was sort of alluded to with Ariana Dumbledore, given how Muggle boys messed with her so much they did something to her after which she was never the same again (similar to how Credance was abused physically and mentally by his mother and by Graves/Grindelwald). That one was there in the last book and you can make the argument it made a half-way decent transition to the screen.

This idea of beings cursed to become animals forever was in the Fantastic Beasts charity book when regarding the Quintaped/"Hairy MacBoon", but that was because their rival clan physically transformed them all into that state, not cursed them to eventually turn into them forever.

Actually, I think the something being referred to was that she was raped by them.

Seen that plenty, but I've never jumped to that conclusion.

Well, it's either that or they hit her over the head with a shovel and gave her brain damage.

After several attempts, I've recently read the first Harry Potter book. It was perfectly fine. The series isn't my type of fantasy - I don't like the Masquerade trope - so I'll probably pass on it. But, I've been reading up on the series and something confuses me...

What do wizards wear in the books? I've looked at the Wiki and done some searching online but couldn't find a proper answer. Do purebreds wear muggle clothes? What exactly is and isn't muggle clothes? I know a lot of adults wear robes, yet I can't imagine Draco wearing that outside of school.

It's exactly what they wear outside of school. Although, it's said that after watching the movie and seeing how ridiculous it looks, Rowling eased off the school uniform dress code a little. Particlularly the hats.

Indeed. At first it was stereotypical wizard and witch garb, pointed hats, broomsticks, wands and whatnot. Then it got toned down to uniforms while in class and outside it wear whatever. I assume that wizards still wear robes and long coats and whatnot as you can see in Fantastic Beasts though.

Adult and older wizards stick with their traditional garb, and actually seem to be very confused by modern muggle dress, as seen in Goblet of Fire with the elderly wizard who thinks he's appropriately attired in a woman's nightgown. ("I bought this in a muggle shop! Muggles wear them!")

Wizards of Harry's generation, even the wizard-raised ones, seem to be more hip to muggle fashion and better able to blend in.

Huh, so Wizards have the Gen X and Millennials thing too. More aware of the outside world and therefore more capable of blending in.

But at the same time in the book, Ron seems somewhat clueless about Muggle tech.

That seems to be more of an issue with Arthur Weasley being an ostensible Muggle tech expert, but being rather confused about it himself. Ron just has information from a poor source.

It's kinda hard to keep the masquerade with everyone gawking like idiots at everything around them. Though it could just be considered a big concentration of weirdos.

Makes me want to introduce smartphones to them, just for the reaction.

You have to imagine that wizards are the weirdos of the Muggle world. The reclusive cat ladies and hermits. The people who seem to always walk around with clothing from the wrong season. The people who are absolutely clueless about fashion, or seem to actively scorn fashion.

They fit the outsider role to the Muggle world, the ones who are excluded and beneath notice because they are weird, reclusive, or deemed mad. It is quite easy to hide in plain side if no one bothers taking notice of you.

The books take place in the 1990s but I find it hard to imagine that even the wizarding world would completely ignore something as major as the rise of the internet.

Why? It's not something they can even see. All they can tell is that suddenly humans are really good at communicating en masse. They might very well conclude that we have our own magic or something.

I mean they describe guns as "Some sort of metal wand that muggles use to kill eachother."

Yeah, wizards are hilariously unperceptive when it comes to Muggle tech.

To be fair, I think the purpose of stuff like Arthur Weasley's lovable stupidity about Muggle technology or elderly wizards wearing women's nightgowsn is an attempt at cheap humor, not serious worldbuilding. In a similar way, the Ministry of Magic is more a parody of how people see the British Government than an actual organization dedicated to keeping people who can transmute each other into animals under control.

My impression is that if you look too hard at the inner workings of the Wizarding World everything tumbles down pretty quickly.

Yes, a fair part of the descriptions of the wizarding world are intended as satire (some lighthearted, some more biting) rather than an attempt to construct a function governmental and social system. It's meant to be a story, not a blueprint or an encyclopedia, and the worldbuilding serves that. It's entertaining enough to create a vivid, living picture of life in the Wizarding World (and one that has been deeply successful in engaging fans - Hogwarts Houses, wands, Quidditch teams, mythic beasts, etc have prompted endless discussions and imaginings).

Good worldbuilding can mean a variety of things. One is that it's good mechanistically - it holds up as something that could exist and function in the real world. Another is that it draws the reader in and makes them feel part of the world, and the Wizarding World succeeded in doing that for a generation of readers. It's different enough from our world to be entertaining, and close enough that it's very easy for a kid to imagine themself there.

One of the hardest parts of growing up was realizing that Harry Potter, and JK Rowling, just weren't that good.

Because, despite the wonders of Hogwarts, 11-year-old muggleborns who grew up with the Internet are not going to suddenly forget how amazing muggle communications are when they spend the school year at a castle where the best options for talking to the outside world are handwritten letters and the occasional head in a fireplace. On the contrary, after their first drubbing in a Transfiguration exam they're going to quickly want to regain the ability to Google, and I expect a sizable fraction of them, upon graduating in the mid-to-late Oughts, will spend their early careers either creating a magical way to access the Internet or coming up with a wizarding equivalent.