I think Harry Potter is hilariously retarded, and every time someone writes out some of the faux-Latin "spells" I can't help but laugh hard.
I think Harry Potter is hilariously retarded, and every time someone writes out some of the faux-Latin "spells" I can't help but laugh hard.
The books kept my interest when I was in middle school and high school, but now I don't think I could actually read one. They're insanely contrived and repetitive, and not very interesting to read from a structural standpoint.
All these counterarguments make minimal good sense but tell me, what does Potter have to fear from Voldemort if he can somehow deflect everything he can throw at him through the power of love. Seriously this concept of love is not as well thought out as the Force is. Where are the limitations, the cans and can't do's, what can one acheive through it, how can one abuse it? Surely Voldemort can learn to use the power of love (through hate) to defeat this boy
Last edited by Bart's Friend Milhouse; 11-14-2006 at 11:01 AM.
...Geddit?
I seriously am wondering if you read the books...
Anyways, Harry cannot deflect everything with the power of love. The thing is that he was protected from being touched by Voldermort in books 1, 2, 3 and most of 4 because the blood of his mother, who died to protect him flowed through him. In Goblet of Fire, when Voldermort is ressurected, Harry's blood is used, thus making it possible for Voldermort to touch him. As said earlier, Harry narrowly escapes and only because the core of Harry's wand and Voldemort's wand came from the same phoenix.
At this point in the series (As in up to the end of Half Blood Prince), the only protection that Harry has based on love is two: he is unable to be possessed by Voldemort and also long as he stays at a relative's he is protected. The first is because Harry knows what it is to love, Voldemort on the other hand does not. He is incapable of love. One filled with such hatred and malice cannot possess someone filled with love. Note it was only when he thought of those he love, did Voldemort retreat from his body. The second one returns to the fact that his mom died to save him. Because of this and complicated spells that are no explained in the novel, as long as Harry can call 4 Priver Drive his home and have a room there he will be safe (in the house). Voldemort's greatest weakness is that he does not understand thus underestimates the power of love. Love and the Force are two different things. How you equate the two is beyond me.
I am not equating the two merely just pointing out how poorly constructed the Force makes this theory of love look especially seeing how it is so essential to understanding the basic ideas behind the surviving power of this boy. Yet I jolly well can treat them as equals in the sense that both are the most heaviest influences on understanding some of the basic supernatural content displayed in the two series
Many cinemagoers bought the concept of the Force since it had depth, it was visually pleasing, was modestly original and connected well with the fans. The Force is indeed popular and easily forms the core of the religious aspects and beliefs of the series unlike this so-called power of love, hardly anyone in the Potter world goes around saying "may the power of love be with you" or any other captivating phrase. Yet it did save his life and would be a pretty cool thing to have flowing through the blood in your veins but like a few other disorganised ideas it is dispensible and quite possibly forgettable
I'm starting to see the point here.
You simply don't like Harry Potter. Ok, that's cool. Whatever.
But don't go around acting the like the books don't make sense, when A) There are explainations for everything you've questioned about the Harry Potter plot. b) These explainations make sense c) Your main beef seems to be with the movies which are only a small percentage of what the books are.
Agreed.Originally Posted by Miriel
It's not a question about me disliking Harry Potter, if that was the case I wouldn't have gone the distance of reading the books. But having spent a little time in thought I smelt some rehashing and pondered on whether the whole thing was as cracked up to be what it was. I merely thought a few others would see where I was coming from, but sadly since this is not the case I think we should just bury our differences on this topic and move on.
As a last comment from myself the explanation for some of the events that took place are lame and probably won't ever convince me which is something I am willing to stand by. But like all good franchises these accounts seem to gain consent to the overwhelming majority and that probably was Rowling's objective
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
