Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: drodrey Jun 22 2009, 06:21 PM

I'm competing in a 'tribook tournament' where a Harry Potter fan, Twilight Fan and Percy Jackson fan all attempt to win for their book. I'm representing Harry Potter and the first task is an essay on what I think is the biggest flaw in Harry Potter.

I'm finding it extremely difficult. I've spent the last ten years making up excuses as to why Harry Potter flaws aren't actually flaws. Basically all I've got is deus ex machina, Harry Potter as a character and unoriginality. But I can't actually elaborate on them. Any ideas?

Posted by: Zoom Jun 22 2009, 06:31 PM

Eh, I don't really agree with deus ex machina...every single book (and a lot of the character's actions/motives) lead up to the ending. Just because there's a suprising/confusing ending doesn't mean its deus ex machina.

I also find it pretty difficult, but the first thing that came to my mind was the portrayal of teh Slytherin house as a whole... They're viewed as waaay too much of a bunch of thugs, while the rest of the school is seen as perfect.

Posted by: SeveraSphyrna Jun 22 2009, 07:35 PM

Hmmm...some ideas...

Deus ex machina

Book 1: Harry's mother's sacrifice saves Harry from Voldemort!Quirrell
Book 2: Fawkes saves Harry from the Baselisk and its venom
Book 4: Priori incantatem saves Harry from Voldemort
These were all foreshadowed in the books, though, so I'm not sure they came out of nowhere.

Book 7 is the worst for this though...off the top of my head...

The sword of Gryffindor in the pond (yeah, Snape put it there, but it happened to come at the right time)---and then again when Neville got it out of the sorting hat.

The Deluminator having powers that no one knew about before (transport, finding people, etc.)

The snitch having skin memory

People being able to use patronuses like cell phones

Wand magic---you could right an entire essay about this.

Ron remembering the parseltongue phrase to open the Chamber of Secrets after five years, even though he only heard it once and was basically imitating the noises.

Dumbledore coming back to explain the plot to Harry at King's Cross

You may want to check out this forum---there was a pretty good discussion of DeM (what was, what wasn't, etc.):
http://www.leakylounge.com/Deus-Machina-HP-series-t64139.html

Unoriginality

Well, DH turns into a quest story, so it has all of the trappings of previous quest novels, the most obvious one is LotR, off the top of my head.

the Deathly Hallows (there's even a ring!)

Characters:
Aragog as Shelbob
Dumbledore as Gandalf
Kreature as Gollum/Smeagol
Wormtail as Wormtongue (some people think Snape is Wormtongue)
Dementors as ringwraiths
I'm sure there's a website out there with all of the comparisons, since this is the one that has been most-referenced (in my searching, at least).

Not sure what you're looking for in terms of Harry's character though...

Do you mean character flaws (i.e. at times, insolent, not that bright, etc.) or contradictions (i.e. spell use, behavior, etc.)?

If you're looking for the latter, the use of unforgivable curses comes to mind---he can't use crucio against Bellatrix in OotP after she kills Sirius, but can use it when Amycus Carrows spits on MacGonagall (?). Not sure I buy that he was able to "mean it" when someone spit on his teacher, but didn't mean it when someone killed his godfather...

Have you ever read the Deathly Hallows Spork?
It goes chapter by chapter through Deathly Hallows and it's a pretty good record of various problems, including Deus ex Machina, plot holes, etc. (and it's fun to read, even if you enjoyed the books).
http://community.livejournal.com/deadlyhollow/2663.html

Posted by: Zoom Jun 22 2009, 09:16 PM

Also, there's a difference between a coincidence and DeM. DeM: when wrongs are corrected by a force that does not fit along with the story (i.e. a Greek god(dess) comnig down to solve everything, or some random king fixing the problems (r.e. Tartuffe))

There's no problem with some of these.


That was Dumbledore. Scrimegeour even said that it was of DD's own design.



What's the problem with that? Dumbledore invented this safe method of communication for the Order, and it's been talked about many times before.


It was said in the Prince's Tale that Hermione disclosed the information, and phineas heard it and relayed it to Snape.



That's explicitly outlined in the books. It's not an unexpected force...it's magic (isn't magic what they've been doing the last 7 books?)



That's not an unknown force coming to fix all the problems. Those were deep, subtle laws of Wand lore that were explicitly explained to the reader via Ollivander.

That talk with Olivander explained the inheritance of wands, so therefore it is fair game for the end of the book.

**also, I found that 'commentary' you cited to be a bunch or sarcasm from a serious pessimist. who ever wrote that has some issues.

Posted by: ABrannock Jun 22 2009, 09:45 PM

His biggest flaw is he's foolish, not dumb, just foolish. Why didn't he ever go to people in authority before setting out to fight some evil? For instance, when he took it upon himself to go save Sirius. Why didn't he enlist the help of the only one who Voldemort was afraid of, not to mention other wizards more powerful than he? I know he felt pressed for time but couldn't he send off an owl or patronus? If not, then muggle technology is better than magic. Cell phones are great.

Posted by: lupinwandcaster Jun 22 2009, 09:50 PM

Stop! This is ruining the book!

Posted by: SeveraSphyrna Jun 22 2009, 11:34 PM

I agree, but they are ones that are frequently mentioned and why I posted the link for the discussion, since people disagree. As for DeM, it doesn't just have to come from a random person, god, etc. though. It can be from the sudden appearance of something that fixes a problem, something that could have been introduced earlier in the plot (if you've read Crichton's Andromeda Strain, that is a classic example). The coincidence was ramped up to the nth degree in the last book because she had a lot of ground to cover. I should also say that I don't mind deus ex machina or coincidences or surprises when they are interspersed and don't come at you all at once. I just found myself thinking "um...really?" a lot while reading the last book....it was just too much all at once and at least some of it could have been brought up sooner.



The point being that it came at the end of a series of seven books about witchcraft and wizardry. You'd think that since they were teaching children how to use wands, that the teachers would have taught them about wand magic as well (a perfect time would have been in CoS with the dueling club, for example). I'm sure Ollivander wasn't the only authority on the subject (there were other wandmakers too) and it seems to me that at least some of this would have been in one of their textbooks (I don't recall that it was). Yes, wand magic is complicated, but understanding what happens due to disarming, etc. should be common knowledge among the adults who are using wands (especially since there was a previous war).



Actually, it was written by several people---all of whom were/are big HP fans. Yes, it is a bit snarky at times, but some of the chapters are quite funny (especially the one where the author tracks Harry's and Voldemort's movements before the Battle at Hogwarts). Even with the gripes, I still love the series and liked the 7th book (though not as much as the others).



Sorry. I don't want to ruin the book by any means. There's a lot to love, but there's also a lot to discuss.

Posted by: Kalin Jun 23 2009, 01:33 AM

I think the major flaw is that the plot and a lot of the plot devices are complicated, and while information is plentiful, it's hard to sort out the merely fascinating from the crucial facts when reading the whole story for the first time.

Deus ex Machina might apply to a few things (fiendfyre, the Weasleys' car in the Forbidden Forest) but I disagree with the wandlore criticism. There are no complete surprises in DH as far as I'm concerned, it has all been foreshadowed or implied (the statement that the wand chooses the wizard in book one never excludes the possibility that wands can be inherited or pass from owner to owner via different means; Ron and Neville being excellent examples). While wandlore might be mysterious and subtle, the case of the Elder wand is fairly straight forward. Harry has won the wand that disarmed last master of the Elder wand, thus he is the wizard with the closest affinity to that wand (or its 'master'). The only new information we get in DH is that wands cannot only be inherited but their allegiance can also be won (hardly an overload of new or surprising information).

Snape was obviously ready to pass the sword on from when the trio left for the Horcrux hunt, he just didn't know where they were until Hermione mentioned it and Phinneas Nigellus overheard her. I know that this has already been pointed out but it is actually a good example of something that Jo does quite often which is that something appears to be Deus ex Machina, mainly because we are on Harry's journey and at the time he doesn't have all the information, and just like when Fawkes arrives to help him in CoS, he finds out how it all transpired afterwards.

Ron has heard Harry using the parseltongue word for 'open' a lot more recently than in CoS: Harry uses it to open the Horcrux locket in DH, 'The Silver Doe' before Ron stabs it

As for Dumbledore coming back to explain the plot: Is it really so, or is Harry hallucinating on the brink of death? It's happening in his head, but is it real, or is Harry drawing his own conclusions using Dumbledore as his voice of reason?

Posted by: drodrey Jun 23 2009, 03:18 AM

Thank you so so so much. Honestly that is amazing, just what I need. I'm going to do deus ex machina because, although I don't particularly agree with the majority of it, it has a legitimate point and is very hard to debate against.

Really, thank you so much for the help, everyone. I'm not happy writing about it either but I want Harry Potter to win so I'm going to do the best job that I can

Posted by: ChristianWizardWorld Jun 25 2009, 10:07 AM

@Bold: No.....just, no. In fact, these books' originality is the one thing that made them so great for me! It takes a vague concept - wizardry - and makes a whole new world out of it.

For me, the big flaw is the unfulfilled potential. You can do pretty much anything with a series that focuses around magic, yet these books don't do much to explain what everyday life is like at Hogwarts, or for that matter, for a wizard or witch who is younger than eleven years old. That said, Harry doesn't really seem that impressed with a school of magic. Instead, he just worries about if he isn't cut out to be a wizard. If the first book showed some sort of struggle where Harry is unable to do magic because of a lack of confidence, then maybe he'd have a reason for saying "Hey, look, a magic school......meh, I wouldn't fit in. Find some other protagonist." At which point Dumbledore sticks his head in the scene. But now I'm just getting off topic.

So, yeah, less "boo-hoo!", more "ooh, aah!".

Still, if Rowling wanted to explain everything about the magic world, she'd write a Potterpedia, which she seems to be doing at the moment. No other story with magic in it explains it in a scientific way, but that could've been a way to set it apart from the other stories.

Posted by: no1hpfan Jun 25 2009, 03:45 PM

I think the biggest flaw is how much she (Rowling) builds up harry's power. He is only the way he is BECAUSE of 1. his parents 2. Voldermort also he escapes by luck most of the time. For instance he escapes from the grave yard due to the wand connections. Also he does not defeat He Who Must Not Be Named, Voldemort dies due to his own error. Yes he does posses bravery and courage but his power is exaggerated to make th plot more interesting.

Posted by: Caracticus Jun 25 2009, 09:28 PM

The biggest flaw, for me, comes near the end...

Harry in the great hall, surrounded by pretty much EVERY good and evil witch and wizard in the Wizarding world.

Shouting at the top of his lungs that "I am the true master of the Elder Wand!"

Dumbledore was the unknown master of the Elder Wand for years. Before him, it was Grindelwald who was not known to be the master, either: even Gregorovitch didn't know the identity of the person who stole it... no one but Dumbledore knew that Grindelwald had the Elder Wand... so no one attacked Grindelwald OR Dumbledore SPECIFICALLY to get the wand from them.

So, Harry goes shouting about it in front of everybody.

I don't think he could have made it to "19 years later" with every sinister or power-hungry magical being out to get him so they would be the master of the wand.

While I did find the ending satisfying, I think this is a gigantic plot hole that, like others in the series, I chalk up to better storytelling at the cost of 100% logical plot... and make allowances like "well, the narrative didn't state explicitly that everyone could hear them" etc, but there was no evidence that any 'muffliato' spell was used etc to keep what was said between Harry and Voldy.

Posted by: MaraudingDon Jun 25 2009, 09:40 PM

Deus ex machina can be elaborated on in many ways and is probably your best bet for an essay. I would add to the lists already suggested the use of Hermione's "magic purse" in DH. Possibly one of the laziest plot devices I have ever read.

Posted by: roonwit Jun 26 2009, 05:21 AM

You are forgetting that few would know the significance of that statement, as only a few people like Xeno Lovegood who know that Harry means a specific wand and not a wand that just happens to be made of elder. Any in the hall who do happen to know the significance will either be friendly to Harry, dead, or off to Azkaban for a very long time (Luna might know, Hermione and Ron do know, but it is unlikely anyone else would, because Harry hasn't told anyone else, and Voldemort wouldn't want to make known the power of wand he wants for himself).

Posted by: lupinwandcaster Jun 27 2009, 09:11 PM

The fact that Lupin died was the biggest flaw.

Posted by: Doctor of the Books Jul 2 2009, 01:24 PM

I think that Rowling did a pretty good job on these books, but I'll tell you what I would have done differently if I was writing them: I wasn't satisfied with the ending at all. I mean, Harry defeats Voldemort so the Wizarding World can return to the status quo, as implied in the epilogue.

I didn't like that, because when you think about it, the status quo might very well have been what started the Death Eater problem in the first place.

I would have had the books end with the war against Voldemort being so devastating that wizards are no longer able to hide from Muggles. In which they are forced to step out of isolation.

Posted by: The_Courtezan Jul 2 2009, 03:09 PM

The part I couldn't quite reconcile was the Limbo she put on Dumbledore and Harry. I mean, my theory is that JKR read the Stephen King book "Misery" (or saw the movie with Kathy Bates), realized that her fans would scream and maybe trash her house if she killed Harry, and then resolved her issues by sort of having her cake and eating it too. Don't get me wrong--the fangirl in me LOVES the fact that Harry survived, and also that Dumbledore didn't actually die (because yes, I cried when my favorite Potions Master killed the Headmaster), but it seemed rather...too neat for my taste.

Posted by: MaraudingDon Jul 3 2009, 07:27 PM

LOL, well I certainly agree that Lupin should not have died, but that really isn't a flaw in itself. So I would expand on this a little and look back at J.K. Rowling's planning and change of heart during the writing process.

What we know from interviews is that Lupin was not originally meant to die, but instead he took the bullet for Arthur whom Rowling could not bear to kill off in OotP. What that meant though is for the books to go full circle, another "father" had to die.

There wasn't another one though, and so we get an extremely rushed relationship, marriage and pregnancy from the end of HBP to the beginning of DH for Lupin and Tonks. I never once believed in the sincerity of this relationship and it appears too contrived for the purpose of the plot. This I feel is a flaw.

As much as I love Arthur, killing him off as she originally intended would have created a fantastic dynamic to so many other peripheral characters.

Posted by: SeveraSphyrna Jul 3 2009, 08:40 PM

I agree, especially considering that slavery, racism, and classism are seemingly integral parts of wizarding society and these things persisted while Voldy was largely of the picture between the two wars. JKR brings these issues up, but does not satisfactorily resolve them. It is implied (though we really do not know what happened during the intervening 19 years) that "all was well" because Voldemort bit it. Because of this, I'd like to know what "all was well" actually means.



Killing off father figures, however rude, is part and parcel of a masculine "rites of passage" story. To truly stand on one's own, direct guidance must end. Once she killed off DD, I figured all of them would go eventually. I'm surprised that she didn't kill Hagrid and Arthur, as well, actually.

I agree that the Remus/Tonks relationship was rushed and contrived. It came so out of left field, for me, that I remember saying "What??" out loud towards the end of HBP. This ended up getting worse for me during DH because of the repeated references to Remus' ambivalence about the whole thing. I don't consider it a flaw, though. I just think JKR wanted Remus' story to have some reasonably happy closure (rather than just kill him off like she did to all of the other thirty-something presumably single men).

Posted by: wickedboy Jul 4 2009, 05:24 AM

A nice flaw or plot hole is Snape being a loyal death eater at a time when they were targeting and killing Order members and Muggleborns on a daily basis - meaning Lily was targeted every day as an active Order member and Muggleborn. Yet when her son is "targeted" - and she may be killed in the process, he is willing to ask Voldy to spare her and even betray him by going to Dumbledore for help.

The only way I see to reconcile that is to assume Snape saw an opportunity to have Lily for himself in the situation and was moved to act - where he had no reason to try to "spare or save" her otherwise on a daily basis when she was targeted for death by him and his DE buddies on a daily basis. That could be true, then there wouldn't be a plot hole.

Posted by: Marine Jul 4 2009, 06:48 AM

As for me, one of the biggest flaws was Harry's death and his conversation with Dumbledore. "Yeh, you're dead but you saved them all, you did what your mother did, therefore here's the possibility for you to come back from the dead and to kick Voldemort's ass".
Seriously, this part was way too big and unrealistic (as much unrealistic as a magic world can be of course ).
For me, Harry should have totally died or not at all. Because he may have died but coming back to life was just ridiculous. Everyone knew she would never kill the goose that laid the golden eggs anyway.
I was a big fan from the beginning but the end truly disappointed me.