J K Rowling - Blog Posts

"I don't like JRK but I still love Harry Potter"

You have blood on your hands

Burn your fucking Harry Potter merch or be burned with it.

I'm fucking livid.

For whatever reason, I found myself thinking about the theme of heritage/inheritance in Harry Potter and how it's, like, catastrophically broken in the text.

The villains in Harry Potter are almost unanimously racist and classist - they believe they are entitled to behave however they wish and live at the top of the social hierarchy because they were born to rich, pureblooded families, and anyone who wasn't is filth to be exploited and/or purged. That's the philosophy of evil in the book - "I deserve everything because I was born in the right family with the right genes and the right social standing. My heritage makes me better than you."

All the injustice and evil in the books is rooted in this belief in entitlement by way of heritage. People are abused and die because of it. Inherited wealth and status, and more specifically the unfair priveleges it affords, is the root of evil in Harry Potter.

So you'd think the protagonist would present some sort of strong contrast to it, right? That they'd be born poor, or mixed race, etc. But no, Harry is from a rich pureblood family, with the vast wealth and social status that affords.

Well, that's OK, we can still make a contrast. Maybe Harry differs in how he acts with wealth - perhaps, realizing his inheritance is an unfair privilege, he gives it away? Maybe he works to give the underprivileged their due? Again, no, not really. He sometimes buys stuff for his poor friend Ron, and defends his "mudblood" friend Hermione from racist criticism, but he sees no reason to change the system that dehumanizes them in the first place, and by the end of the tale is pleased to exploit his privilege for his own gain.

The whole house elf subplot illustrates this failing well - we have a race of slaves who are frequently shown to suffer from abuse. One of them, the property of a rich racist, risks his life to save Harry, and Harry frees him in return. Oh, nice, finally fighting the system, eh? Except no, not really - while Harry frees that specific slave, he's content to leave the others in bondage, especially when he inherits a slave of his own.

The contrast Harry Potter puts up against its rich, racist, privileged villains is "Hey, being rich and higher in the hierarchy is awesome and just, but you can't be a dick about it." That slaves belong in the dirt, but masters should be polite while putting them in their place.

Voldemort posits himself as the heir of Slytherin - claiming his inheritance is vital to his rise to power and villainy. And Harry opposes him by... also claiming inheritance from a rich old dead guy. Hell, the final battle comes down to who rightfully inherits a specific rare Wand!

The fact that Harry and Voldemort have shit in common is not a flaw on its own - villains and heroes are often foils for each other. But in this specific tale, the relationship the villain has with inherited power is so central to the conflict that the hero having the exact same relationship is a major failing. The story is just shy of saying "Voldemort was basically right, but he shouldn't have been rude about it." It's bad from both a moral and a writing skill perspective.

(The only inheritance Harry fully rejects is parseltongue, i.e. the ability to talk to snakes, which was accidentally given to him by Voldemort, and could be argued to be a symbol of trauma rather than inherited wealth. Also I'm still salty about how that series turned on snakes so cruelly, but that's a whole other rant.)

Burning <3

"I don't like JRK but I still love Harry Potter"

You have blood on your hands

Burn your fucking Harry Potter merch or be burned with it.

I'm fucking livid.

Little sticker of Luna and Neville, trying out a cartoony style.

Wouldn't the world be a better place if a nice writer (like Rick Riordan) wrote Harry Potter instead of Joanne Katheen Rowling

Must we suffer daily?

My brother and I had an argument a couple days ago. He was convinced, that sometimes we are required to undergo the labour of things we do not agree with or do not specifically enjoy, in order to bring monetary safety to our lives. He said, that he would have no objection to working a boring job if it guaranteed an agreeable salary.

Yes, I must admit that economy and money are very important parts of the world's present arrangement and basically I'm quite settled with this. But I believe (or at least hope), that this system can work effectively even in case you have a job to your liking. For example, you have a literature-related diploma and you go and work as a literary agent or as a publishing company's assistant. You might never become J. K. Rowling in magnitude but you'll work with material you're compassionate about. AND you're still not starving.

Naturally, not everything is highly profitable. And my brother has absolutely no vision of a profession he'd enjoy. For him it's a situation, where, even if he tried, he probably would never find the job of his dreams. Because his obsession is something that has no similarity with any existing job. (Though I'm not quite sure if my brother has any interest in anything at all)

So according to me, and you should take my thoughts lightly, we live in a comfortable historical period, when we are allowed and enabled to pursue happiness in nearly every possible way. Laws are meant to limit us but that's just sanity... Now is a great time to attempt to do marvellous and memorable things. We have all chances to become the people we wish to be.

There are always words of recession and political distress but these news only hold us back, though we would actually have the chance and capacity to transform into our own dreams. We shouldn't listen to the voices, that keep us slowing down and take unwanted and misleading turns.

Today is the perfect day to achieve anything but I'm not quite sure tomorrow will be the same, so let's be quick to break-up with the dead-end habits and misbeliefs.