Plot holes out the ass. You must be from /tv/.

>harry potter
>inner strength

The main hero is a useless retard. Whenever the smart people try to teach him anything important he lacks in both intelligence and dedication. He gets himself into moronic situations all the time and would've died 50 times over if not saved by his deus ex machina friends/teachers/etc.

He defeats the bad guy by DYING.

No they're not.

Deus Ex Machina like crazy. Half the damn plot is just "remember that item we mentioned two books ago? Well it sense when you're in trouble then flies over to you and saves you."

Wow /lit/ is filled with retards.

>>1931024
I don't think you even know what a plothole is bro

>>1931028
How about giving reasons

>>1931034
>half the damn plot
>only at the end of Chamber of Secrets

...k

>>1931027

Oh god I lol'd

>>1931024
>Butthurt out the ass.
I personally like to side with Stephen on this one(Who you may or may not know provided the quote in your pic). Though he also happens to be quite disliked on thing board.

>>1931027
No actually he faked his death and waited for the right opportunity to attack. The fact you don't even know what happens makes your opinion useless.

So is this thread proof /lit/ is so dumb they can't even discuss children's books?

>>1931035
>How about giving reasons

I'll address your image specifically. Harry Potter is not about "controlling fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of adversity." Harry Potter is about being a special and unique snowflake and overcoming evil with the power of love and friendship-- basically the same exact thing that Vegietales or any other children's show/film/cartoon is about.

>>1931039
>Chamber of Secrets
>Sword comes back to Neville in Deathly Hallows
>Mother's protection
>Twin Cores
>love drives Voldemort out of his body in book 5

All of those are Deus Ex Machina.

>>1931034
Not just that, but new spells are introduced completely arbitrarily wherever they're needed to help Rowling out of the corner she's written herself into...

>>1931047
He started off as a nobody who was treated like a dog. Also pointing out a reoccurring trope doesn't make a story bad numbnuts.

>>1931062
It's magic I don't have to explain shit.

>>1931063
Did you accidentally respond to the wrong post?

I don't see what that has to do with anything.

>>1931066
>special unique snowflake
wrong and missing the point
>friendship and love
Yeah the TROPE part I mentioned. So yes I am responding to your post. Basically it shows you think it's wrong for a book to use friendship as a means which has been done since the dawn of time.

>>1931070
>wrong and missing the point

That's the entire fucking main point of the series, it's a guy that succeeds despite being a useless asshole retard, because he's the chosen one.

http://hicsuntleones.deviantart.com/#/d2on4cj

I got so tired of seeing this fucking thread over and over again that I just put my response here.

>>1931064
I haven't read them, but my wife has read most of them. From what she told me, Rowling will bring a new spell out of the blue to fix a problem--like, "oh, yeah, by the way, we've got this is you think it'll help." And nobody bothered to bring this up before? Again, haven't read them. That's just the way it's been portrayed to me.

1st book, JK rowling learns how to spell. I was amazed that it was published. The idea was interesting but the literary quality was missing even the basic storytelling apparatus a young adult book has was missing.

Book 2 through the rest plotholes opportunities to explore emotions that were replaced with angry trees and obnoxious stereotypical child like whining, deus ex machina as was suggested but not just in the climax, sometimes it was on every other page. Hermione was at times a repeat offender although dumbledore or his proxy showed up way too often

>>1931076
He went from a sheltered antisocial kid and had something called character development and took on his responsibilities to take down Voldemort. I don't think you have any idea how to criticize a book if you resort to using ad hominem.

>>1931070
>wrong and missing the point
Whoa. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Harry Potter is not a special and unique snowflake? Need I remind you that in the first book everyone expected great things from him just because he was Harry Potter? Need I remind you that Harry was told that he's super awesome at catching the golden snitch because apparently he inherited that awesomeness from his father? Are you forgetting about that whole "chosen one" and "boy who lived" thing?

Secondly, you're confusing "trope" with "cliche." Learn the difference.

>Are the HP books well-written?
No. Great storytelling and world building though.

>>1931080
I don't know what you are talking about. It was pretty much stated at the beginning there were spells for everything. So it wasn't ass pulls as if oh yeah here is some new spell out of the blue to save us etc. Also once again I find it hilarious you guys talk about a book you haven't even read.

>>1931087
10/10

>>1931086
Except you ignored the human world where he was treated like shit. He had two sides of a coin you idiot. 1.He is a nobody. 2. In magic world he was a celebrity. Which is already a interesting concept to play with. So yeah I don't agree with you for the human world.

>>1931085
>He went from a sheltered antisocial kid and had something called character development and took on his responsibilities to take down Voldemort.

Uh, that's fucking wrong.

Harry doesn't develop as a character. That's part of a reason why the books are so bad.

His social status improves, but that's not character development. And as for "taking responsibilities" to bring down Voldemort? He was doing that shit in the first fucking book!

This is outright silly.

It's a good series for children from middle school down.

>>1931090
>1.He is a nobody. 2. In magic world he was a celebrity.

You're missing the fucking point. He is still a unique and special snowflake in the human world; he's just a SECRET unique and special snowflake. Just like the reader! You see what I did there?

I don't recall any spells being used as a deus ex machina (Maybe that fire one in the last book? Does it count as a deus ex machina if the bad guys use it?). Really, they go to a magic school, of course they're going to learn spells to open locks and knock people out. I'd feel pretty cheated if it was a series about wizards without any actual magic.

I haven't read the books since the last one came out though, so I dunno.

>>1931097
a deus ex machina would be more like Ron speaking in Parceltongue to open the Chamber of Secrets, despite Parceltongue being the unlearnable language.

Or the Time Turner.

>>1931087

How in god's name is the world building good? To me, the world building is the worst part of the whole series. The world is so bare bones, the only things introduced are things that are essential to the plot. By the end of the series, I would guess that Harry uses or has been introduced to about 20 spells, and the total number of spells that have been mentioned, either directly or in passing, is about 50. I can't back this up, but that's the feeling I get from numerous readings and re-readings growing up.

Also, as far as world building, why do the Death Eaters use anything but the killing curse? Avada Kedavra is ridiculous and overpowered and should not have been included in the books without limitations put on it.

Felix Felicius and The time turners are just other examples of stuff Rowling put in that just totally fuck up the way her world works. I'm sure I could come up with more if it weren't 4AM.

>>1931088
>It was pretty much stated at the beginning there were spells for everything.
But in any bit a logical world, they're not going to keep these extremely pertinent spells tucked under their robs and never mention them. They could've used them in preventative ways. You ever think she said they have spells for everything so she can get away with whatever shit she wants to pull?

>>1931106
Everyone mentions the time turner for a reason. If you can go back in time, why not go anywhere back in time? Just kill Voldermort since he was a little kid.

People keep saying:
>she said there were spells for anything
>hurr she explained it by not explaining it

THAT IS BAD WRITING.

>>1931090
>Mistreated in one world
>Celebrity in another
>interesting concept
No, it's one of the biggest cliches in the fantasy genre

Why is /lit/ mostly populated by children?

>>1931134
> don't agree that Harry Potter is a masterpiece
> we're children
fuck off Rowling

>>1931110
You ever dealt with time before? I'm pretty sure if you go back and change one thing you really fucked up the future in general. So I don't think that's a real argument.

>>1931114
No the problem I thought was people said she asspulled spells to get them out of certain situations. Which ones exactly? Using a levitation spell to beat a troll? What was wrong with that exactly?

>>1931137
How can a future without Voldemort be fucked up?
Besides, they already used it for something not as significant (more classes for certain students, saving Harry's godfather) so why not use it to save the world from the Dark Lord?

>>1931137

But it's not like they'd have to go back 50 years! Do you not get how this stuff works? Example:

The night Voldemort gets killed the first time, when Harry's parents die, Dumbledore finds out about it. Instead of going and finding Harry, he uses a time turner and rapes the fuck out of Voldemort with the elder wand inside the Potter's house. Nothing major is changed except Harry's parents live. The time turners don't only exist when Harry sees them, they existed the whole time. Dumbledore saving Harry's parents from death in that situation would theoretically have no more implications on the timeline than rescuing Sirius from death in Harry's 3rd year.

>>1931141
Let's face it. The time turners are just a minor gimmick not to be taken very seriously in the larger scheme of things.

>>1931141

I agree that Harry Potter is badly written but you seem to have forgotten that Voldemort was massively powerful at the point just before he kills Harry's parents.

>>1931141
And yet he didn't do it, despite the fact that:
1. They were part of his order of phoenix
2. He had a chance to finally stop voldy

What about when Dumbledore is killed the first time? Yes, it was his intention all along but our characters didn't knew that. They just had to use the time turner and stop snape/draco from killing the director.

>>1931140
>>1931141
Um ever read sound of thunder? Change one thing and everything changes even killing a fly. If you change voldemort it could make people not be born it's a trigger effect.

>>1931141
um what would you consider good?

>>1931150
So fucking what? They still use the time turner for meaningless shit anyway

>>1931144
time turner was I think destroyed by harry potter fans too late for me to google though

>>1931150

The changes in sound of thunder took place over millions of years.

The change in HP would have taken place a couple hours earlier. Sure, Dumbledore killing Voldemort could have changed the world drastically millions of years from the present, but so could freeing Sirius. Again, there are no forseeable changes that could have occured in that time span (from Dumbledore going back and saving the Potters) that couldn't have occured from the trio freeing Sirius. You are just a complete fool, your logical leap at the need to defend your childhood has taken you to comparing millions of years to a few hours and feeling good about it.

The HP books were a big part of my childhood and i really liked them and still do, but I can still admit that they are shallow and poorly written.

>>1931135
No I said you were children because arguments like harry is an asshole for hating it is ridiculous

>>1931154
The Harry Potter time turner plot hole is explained in the books. They can't go very far back in the first place, you have to go through a crap load of paper work to rent one from the ministry of magic so many people don't bother with them, Harry manages to accidentally destroy all of the ones not being rented (Almost all of them) by having a fire fight in the room where they were kept.

So yeah if you pay attention you know what you are talking about.

>>1931170

>Oh gee, I have to fill out some paperwork for THE ABILITY TO TRAVEL IN TIME.
>TOTALLY NOT WORTH IT, GUYS.

>>1931170
hahaha
> you have to go through a crap load of paper work to rent one from the ministry of magic so many people don't bother with them
Hey, why stop voldy from being revived? too many papers

> Harry manages to accidentally destroy all of the ones not being rented (Almost all of them) by having a fire fight in the room where they were kept.
Because they were made by ancient sages and the secrets of their fabrication was lost. We also need hundreds of them even though Hermione used just one.

>>1931170

ARE YOU REALLY THAT STUPID?

>WELL WE COULD USE THIS TO KILL VOLDEMORT AND SAVE LIVES BE WE WONT CUZ LOL PAPERWORK.

THATS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. HOLY SHIT MAN


FOR THE CANT GO BACK VERY FAR SEE THIS:
>>1931160
>>1931141

>>1931172
>>1931171

Holy shit im glad somebody else thought that was as stupid as I did.

>>1931176
You all ignored point you can only go back so far good going faggots

>>1931173
Not his point was that you can only go back so far I'm sure you dick.

http://blogs.forbes.com/benzingainsights/2011/07/15/is-harry-potter-better-than-tolkien-narnia-and-s
tar-wars/

*important story* for aspies

>>1931179
>>1931177

OH MY GOD YOU'RE SO DUMB.

DO YOU NOT GET IT, THEY COULD HAVE DONE IT RIGHT AFTER HE KILLED THE POTTERS AND ONLY GONE BACK A FEW HOURS. LIKE DUMBLEDORE AND EVERYONE STILL EXISTED AND STILL HAD MAGIC THEY DIDNT HAVE TO GO BACK FAR. HOW CAN YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

>>1931184
>caps lock on
Stopped there

>>1931187
>can't refute point
>look like an idiot
>blame caps lock


Sure is told in this thread.

>>1931140

because at somepoint in his ascend to power he cast a spell that prohibited such things from succeding.

>>1931179
>>1931177

Oh my god you're so dumb.

Do you not get it? They could have done it right after he killed the Potters and only gone back a few hours. Like Dumbledore and everyone still existed and still had magic they didn't have to go back far. How can you not understand?

>>1931187
Fixed that for you, now you can respond and try to save your incredibly feeble argument.

>>1931192

Oh good, he's admitting defeat.

>>1931193
All stories can be nitpicked also read forbes blog it makes fun of your type.

>>1931199

Sooooooo you're saying that I'm right.

>>1931199

There's a difference between nitpicking and massively huge plotholes. Just saying.

>>1931201
see
>>1931142

>>1931203

What about the Tri-Wizard Cup?

>Voldemort demonstrates ability to infiltrate Hogwarts and replace teachers there with polyjuice clones.
>Doesn't just kill Harry in his sleep or something.
>Duhhrrr.

>>1931203
>>1931199

huttburt

>>1931201
Yeah lotr they could flied eagle and dropped the ring off instead of walking

>>1931206
no arguments thanks for the victory kiddo!

>>1931205

See:

>>1931209

>>1931208
Exactly.

Hey, guys. I'm new to /lit/.

So Harry Potter causes such a shitstorm here...

Note to self: Never mention Harry Potter here.

>>1931213
NOt like you would have any reason to on a literature board, as opposed to a children's fiction message board.

>STOP LIKING WHAT I DONT LIKE
Yeah it's a good book series ignore the trolls

>>1931215
I'm taking a neutral side here.

>>1931208
no one's praising lotr for good writing either. just for being an influence for all the fantasy stuff out there

In fact, Tolkien was heavily criticized at its time.

>>1931212
It's still a good book series too

>>1931170
looks like we got some paperwork to do

i dont know, i thought the harry potter books were alright.

>>1931219
Except it isn't.

>>1931019
The story is pretty good for the msot part, but writing is amateurish. She's a clever and inspired woman, but she really isn't a professional novelist.

Again, plotting is mostly good after book one, though later books occasionally get muddy (books 2 and 3 have plots clear as dew). Writing, on the other hand, is mostly adverbs and shitty attributions and questionable dialogue.

Harry Potter is better than Twilight because it made more money. If at some point Twilight overtakes its profits, it will become the better series.

That is the only criterion of this crap. Grow up, /lit/.

>>1931019
They're well-written enough to be compelling.

>fantasy crap

>good

I really don't fucking think so.

>>1932168
so people can't enjoy things?

It's trash, but I still read them all.

not really. The characters are well written to the point that many really care about them, and the atmosphere of the book is pretty good, but in terms of storytelling and narrative it's not that great. It's not bad, and can get pretty good at some points, but overall it's pretty mediocre.

but it's implied in the Order of Phoenix that Dumbledore could have kill Voldmort any time, he doesn't did because of the Horcrux

>>1932162
But they aren't

I like how it "turned a whole generation on to reading" but there's something horribly bitter-sweet about that statement.

JK Rowling is the only good female author

For the plot-hole nitpickers out there, Dumblydore couldn't use the Time-Turner to kill Voldymort because he'd have to destroy all the Horcruxes first, of which he had no means to.
Also, all Time-Turners are destroyed after Book 5, when JK realised it could provide plotholes.

>>1932712
That's a funny way of spelling "Flannery O'Connor."

>>1932745
Holy shit, time travel creates plotholes?

>>1932711
Turned a whole generation on to reading Harry Potter.

>>1932773
That's the bitter part, yeah.

>>1932769
I didn't know Maya Angelou used a nom de plume.

>>1932745
Unless the Horcruxes existed before Voldemort made them... no. That's stupid.

It would make more sense to say "fucking with time too much can have bad consequences, and the kids lucked out in book 3 that they didn't wind up making Voldemort win or something."