Pureblood Half-blood, Red blood Mudblood

[lilian_cho]

I have ranted talked about this to ruien, rea_saint, albichorizon, disarming_smile (closing the MSN window immediately afterward, therefore losing my brilliant exposition) and, most recently, baeraad.

So I figured I should articulate it on LJ to stop repeating myself.

The disjointed "logic" of HP books is frustrating to readers, but more so to fanfic writers who have to reconcile canon facts

Comments

[albichorizon]

<3 <3 <3

You make me want to organize all my memories and bookmarks so that I can find this on a moments notice. :)

I've been in a cynical turn of mind lately, ever since the last book was announced. I was discussing my less then enthusiastic response to the news of DH with a friend recently. She asked if there was any mention that JKR might another book. My internal responses was 'Hasn't she done enough already?"

1. Oh dear, simple logic. It goes like this: Blood doesn't matter, except when the author finds it convient when it does matter.

2. Cynical view The problem with the Weasley's is that they believe thier own propaganda. Rational input The best explination that I have heard about Mr. Weasley is that he acts like a man who has taken up Muggles as a new hobby. He hasn't been studying them for long, therefore he doesn't know much about them. This makes some sense, yet he doesn't seem to learn much from Harry and Hermione and others as the years pass by.

wanders off-topic
Also remember Barty Crouch, Sr.? He was all properly dressed and competant at the QWC. Clearly from the text and the backstory we were supposed to agree with the Trio and think he was evil and cruel. In contrast, Arthur is quite clueless about Muggle ways and his department is in charge of preventing harm to Muggles, also recall his little 'favors' and loopholes. Yet Molly thinks (in HBP) that he was clearly due for a raise and a promotion. Clearly the author wants us to favor cronyism and incompetance - anyone who knows how to do their job and works to enforce the rule of law is clearly bad news.

3. Nowadays I try and take Hermione with a large grain of salt. If these were geared to a more mature audience, some interesting stuff could be done with her. What Hermione believes often seems to be taken as fact - and her bias is rarely remarked on.

4. Refer back to #1 :)

5. Yes, this comparison doesn't quite work. At the first glance there are similarities but when you look at it in depth and think about it (on your own without being told what to think) the situations aren't the same.

[lilian_cho]

*loves back*

Hee :-D *is flattered*

I did talk to you about this before, right? Over MSN once upon a time?

My internal responses was 'Hasn't she done enough already?"

She shouldn't bother, really. I highly doubt she'll write anything anywhere as famous as HP. If I were her, every few years after Book Seven I'd publish a HP character memoir/adventures...starting with Snape *g*
And maybe "Rowena Ravenclaw's Diary: The Years Leading to Salazar Slytherin's Departure."
But leave the future alone (nothing after 1998)--so no Mary Sue child of Harry/Ginny X_x;;

Blood doesn't matter, except when the author finds it convient when it does matter.

And Dumblie's circular logic about Harry's power...HBP ran counter to OotP. But I've given up on trying to understand Harry's supposed "Power that the Dark Lord knows not."
JKR just doesn't reread her books D:

he acts like a man who has taken up Muggles as a new hobby. He hasn't been studying them for long, therefore he doesn't know much about them. This makes some sense, yet he doesn't seem to learn much from Harry and Hermione and others as the years pass by.

Yeah--I guess it's a demonstration of Weasley incompetence?
But Bill to the twins seem brilliant in their own right (and they left the Burrow to live far far away the first chance they got).

Arthur is quite clueless about Muggle ways and his department is in charge of preventing harm to Muggles, also recall his little 'favors' and loopholes. Yet Molly thinks (in HBP) that he was clearly due for a raise and a promotion. Clearly the author wants us to favor cronyism and incompetance - anyone who knows how to do their job and works to enforce the rule of law is clearly bad news.

Eek, can you imagine Arthur as minister? O_o
I'd rather see Lucius as minister--at least he'd make all sort of improvement to make the people love him X-D
Mmmm...Lucius in Armani.

What Hermione believes often seems to be taken as fact - and her bias is rarely remarked on.

I think Dumblie was a Slyth but cleverly covered up the fact!
Also, if Armando Dippet is really such an unfair Headmaster, would he have appointed a Gryffindor as his Deputy Headmaster? (Dumblie was Deputy Headmaster, right? Or was it never said?)

when you look at it in depth and think about it (on your own without being told what to think) the situations aren't the same.

Unless if the half-bloods believe in their own inferiority--which again doesn't really wash because of Voldie and Snape.