|
|
Post by physicssquid on Apr 25, 2015 17:14:07 GMT -5
Also that's a hell of an age adjustment. Usually if they fiddle with Tonks' age it's to make her a little younger so she's in Hogwarts with Harry (which, ironically, according to his canon birthdate, Charlie Weasley should have been). Not old enough to be an auror when Harry was born. Which means either Andromeda had a kid when she was about seven or somebody did not think things through. That's not quite accurate. According to the HP Wiki, Charlie Weasley was born in December 1972, which means he would have started his first year in September 1984. He would have graduated at the end of the school year before Harry's first, in June 1991. Of course, that does lead to the question of, what the hell was JK thinking when she wrote that Gryffindor had been flattened in the last match of the previous year, a year during which Charlie Weasley, supposedly the best Seeker before Harry, was playing? I know that the rest of the team is just as important as the Seeker, but how can JK make anyone believe that Charlie was a damn good Seeker, if his team were defeated as badly as she implied? |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Apr 25, 2015 23:54:15 GMT -5
Didn't JKR write somewhere that Gryffindor hadn't won since Charlie left, but othewhere implied that Gryffindor hadn't won for years? Which made indeed so much sense under the circumstances, seeing that Oliver said Charlie could have played for England ... If you ask me, she once again forgot to do the math properly. Her numbers are messed up all over the series, sadly.
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on Apr 26, 2015 12:16:46 GMT -5
Unless, of course, Charlie didn't play in the last match every year, for whatever reason. Maybe he managed to earn himself detention that was set for the same day as the match. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Snape made sure that the Gryffindor team's best player was unable to play, and therefore the Slytherins would have a better chance of winning. He did something similar in the sixth book, when he made Harry miss the last match of the season by being in detention.
|
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Apr 26, 2015 14:36:08 GMT -5
Also that's a hell of an age adjustment. Usually if they fiddle with Tonks' age it's to make her a little younger so she's in Hogwarts with Harry (which, ironically, according to his canon birthdate, Charlie Weasley should have been). Not old enough to be an auror when Harry was born. Which means either Andromeda had a kid when she was about seven or somebody did not think things through. That's not quite accurate. According to the HP Wiki, Charlie Weasley was born in December 1972, which means he would have started his first year in September 1984. He would have graduated at the end of the school year before Harry's first, in June 1991. Of course, that does lead to the question of, what the hell was JK thinking when she wrote that Gryffindor had been flattened in the last match of the previous year, a year during which Charlie Weasley, supposedly the best Seeker before Harry, was playing? I know that the rest of the team is just as important as the Seeker, but how can JK make anyone believe that Charlie was a damn good Seeker, if his team were defeated as badly as she implied? No it...really doesn't. Charlie's December 1972 birthday means he started Hogwarts the 1984/5 school year. Adding seven school years, he would have finished Hogwarts the 1991/2 school year, which is Harry's first year. Maths. To graduate the 1990/91 school year he'd have had to be born between September 1971 and August 1972. Actually there's a far more logical explanation, which is simply that Charlie didn't take his NEWTs and left after his OWLs. We know England wanted him to play for them, and we don't know if there's a minimum age requirement for playing Quidditch professionally. Given that (like Hermione) Charlie would have turned 17 early in his sixth year, if he left to go study dragons after the Christmas holidays that would give Gryffindor two Quidditch Cups to be flattened and make 'since Charlie Weasley was seeker' make more sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Miss Wings on Apr 26, 2015 16:15:42 GMT -5
I noticed that the author has added a little note at the top now.
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on Apr 26, 2015 20:25:43 GMT -5
That's not quite accurate. According to the HP Wiki, Charlie Weasley was born in December 1972, which means he would have started his first year in September 1984. He would have graduated at the end of the school year before Harry's first, in June 1991. Of course, that does lead to the question of, what the hell was JK thinking when she wrote that Gryffindor had been flattened in the last match of the previous year, a year during which Charlie Weasley, supposedly the best Seeker before Harry, was playing? I know that the rest of the team is just as important as the Seeker, but how can JK make anyone believe that Charlie was a damn good Seeker, if his team were defeated as badly as she implied? No it...really doesn't. Charlie's December 1972 birthday means he started Hogwarts the 1984/5 school year. Adding seven school years, he would have finished Hogwarts the 1991/2 school year, which is Harry's first year. Maths. To graduate the 1990/91 school year he'd have had to be born between September 1971 and August 1972. Actually there's a far more logical explanation, which is simply that Charlie didn't take his NEWTs and left after his OWLs. We know England wanted him to play for them, and we don't know if there's a minimum age requirement for playing Quidditch professionally. Given that (like Hermione) Charlie would have turned 17 early in his sixth year, if he left to go study dragons after the Christmas holidays that would give Gryffindor two Quidditch Cups to be flattened and make 'since Charlie Weasley was seeker' make more sense. The best way to work out when someone was in a certain school year, is to lay it out in a table, similar to this:- CW HP 1984/1985 1 1985/1986 2 1986/1987 3 1987/1988 4 1988/1989 5 1989/1990 6 1990/1991 7 1991/1992 1 1992/1993 2 1993/1994 3 1994/1995 4 1995/1996 5 1996/1997 6 1997/1998 This table isn't the best way to see things, but as you can see, Charlie would not have been in school when Harry started his first year. I'm sorry, but I don't know how you came to the conclusion that Charlie wouldn't have finished his seventh year until the 1991/1992 school year. Also, the end of the seventh year for any student, is seven years after the year the first year began, not seven years after the first year ended. Charlie's first year began in September 1984, adding seven to that, one gets 1991. |
|
|
|
Post by celticmagic on May 3, 2015 19:24:19 GMT -5
I don't know if this has been said or not but the thing that drives me nuts is when someone makes an OC that lives in America and puts them into Hogwarts. Why would an American go to Hogwarts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on May 4, 2015 6:28:06 GMT -5
While that's probably because the author is American and wants an American in the story (how many times is it a self-insert?), I can see a few possibilities. If the parents had to move to GB for job reasons, the child could go to Hogwarts. Or maybe the parents are actually Brits living in the US and want their child to go to Hogwarts like they did themselves. But if it is done for no obvious reason, then that wouldn't make much sense, no. As I usually rather shy away from stories that make OCs that important, I can't say much more, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on May 4, 2015 9:47:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on May 4, 2015 10:00:50 GMT -5
Oh, I don't doubt that some exist that are good, but I suspect most of them aren't. I guess trying to read a few in the beginning and always ending up abandoning them for the mentioned reason isn't really helping me there  |
|
|
|
Post by celticmagic on May 4, 2015 15:57:36 GMT -5
Kitty279 I can understand the whole parents moving away from England but sending their kids there, but having someone just show up with out explanation as to why they are there drives me nuts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on May 5, 2015 0:24:06 GMT -5
As I said, it doesn't make sense when it is done without any reason. Let's be honest, considering the quality of some classes (DADA, History, Potions ...), I can't see American parents sending their kids there just because Hogwarts is so much better than the US schools, either. So even that possibility is out.
So, I suspect in most cases it's really just the author wanting someone from their country there.
|
|
|
|
Post by ÀngryAnon on Jun 7, 2015 18:21:50 GMT -5
Pet peeve - male authors describing teenage girl characters in skimpy swimsuits in detail for reasons more to do with their dicks than the plot. Gets especially gross when they're old enough to be the character's parents and ugh, skeezy   |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Jun 8, 2015 6:19:28 GMT -5
Oh, I don't know ... I've seen enough stories where the girls kept going on and on about Harry's size and how much bigger he is than other boys and the girls bragging about their bra sizes, too ... not any better, if you ask me. But I agree with you, it's not something I need to know. I tend to stop reading anyway if they start going over that in too much detail and forget any plot they might have had until that point in the story, which sadly happens too often.
|
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Aug 17, 2015 17:55:02 GMT -5
Here's a common one
Harry finding wizarding belongings from James and Lily somewhere around the Dursley's house. Now maybe, maybe there are photos of Lily and Petunia as kids, maybe there's even photos from their wedding (depending on when the Evans parents died) and there might even be some of Lily's old belongings, which I can understand since they would have belonged to Mr & Mrs Evans and Petunia was probably the one who packed up the house in Cokeworth.
But their trunks. Their magical trunks with their magical books inside. From Petunia's sister she pretended didn't exist and her magical husband? Which somehow seem to have disappeared from wherever they were before and turned up in Number 4 for the sole purpose of Harry finding them (usually to start him on the road to independence), even though neither Dursley was even slightly willing to have Harry's trunk and owl in the house and would have kept them locked up as much as possible if given half a chance.
I'm not sure where James and Lily's school trunks actually were (presumably either at Gringotts, Godric's Hollow or wherever they lived prior to Godric's Hollow) but I highly doubt they were within ten miles of Number 4 Privet Drive. |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Aug 24, 2015 12:35:14 GMT -5
You are right, that doesn't make much sense. I have seen that a few times and never thought it very logical. I don't think any of the authors ever gave a convincing reason why they were there in the first place, if they gave one at all.
Speaking of trunks, there's another thing I find rather irritating. Why do the authors send Harry to buy a trunk with 5-7 compartments, one with an apartment in it, complete with kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, library and all, lots of furniture and everything - and then he goes to Potter Manor to live there and never uses the trunk at all? It makes no sense wnatsoever to give him such an expensive trunk and then never use it.
|
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Aug 25, 2015 7:32:28 GMT -5
Speaking of trunks, there's another thing I find rather irritating. Why do the authors send Harry to buy a trunk with 5-7 compartments, one with an apartment in it, complete with kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, library and all, lots of furniture and everything - and then he goes to Potter Manor to live there and never uses the trunk at all? It makes no sense wnatsoever to give him such an expensive trunk and then never use it. For the same reason that they have him go on a huge clothes shopping spree either in Diagon Alley or Harrods and then start taking nutrient potions to make him grow. Conspicuous consumption to reinforce how much money he has.
Secondly, I never understood how the whole 'living in a trunk' thing worked. I mean yeah Moody's trunk had seven compartment and yes he was able to survive in there but.
1. The 'room' is a pit, not a functional room 2. It is sealed unless you open the seventh compartment.
which means oxygen is limited and Moody probably only survived because
1. It was a reasonably sizeable pit which means a reasonable amount of oxygen 2. Moody was unconscious, which means he was using less oxygen than an awake and aware person 3. Crouch Jr had to open the trunk at least once every few hours to gather more hair for the polyjuice.
So yes you probably could put a room in a compartmented trunk but you'd only get the one use out of it because you'd suffocate and die very quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Aug 25, 2015 13:10:20 GMT -5
And that's what I always find so stupid - throwing so much money out for nothing. Even more so as I have been to Harrods once and let's just say, I have seen a lot of cheaper shops ... just because Harry has money doesn't mean he needs to spend it without any brain. Or is that only me, as I grew up with little money and learned to use it well? Good point about the oxygen in the trunk, but I am sure if you say that to the authors, they will add magical ventilation. Some magic has to be involved anyway, or how does the bathroom work there? |
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Aug 25, 2015 14:01:00 GMT -5
And that's what I always find so stupid - throwing so much money out for nothing. Even more so as I have been to Harrods once and let's just say, I have seen a lot of cheaper shops ... just because Harry has money doesn't mean he needs to spend it without any brain. Or is that only me, as I grew up with little money and learned to use it well? TBH I can understand the impulse of going from having little money to having what seems like a fortune (or actually is a fortune) after all it's a documented thing which happens to people who have no understanding of financial planning and suddenly get given lots more money than they're used to.
Of course, the sort of fics which give Harry both the huge amount of wealth and the spendthrift characteristics wouldn't let that happen. After all, everything is just a drop in the ocean of Potter wealth even when it's a major investment
Personally I would think Harry would swing to the other end of the spectrum which is, when you've grown up with money or food insecurity, a desire to collect the things which your previous experience says might disappear at any moment and not spend it.
|
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Aug 28, 2015 10:49:28 GMT -5
This is petty and has nothing to do with HP but people who post 15+ drabbles of maybe 500-800 words one after the other after the other on AO3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Aug 28, 2015 15:52:51 GMT -5
Technically I know that it is pretty normal that people who have suddenly money go on to spend lots of it just to show they can, and to feel good about it. But it's still not my style; I'd rather react like you think Harry would, and I suspect you are right about him. In the books, he never came over as someone who throws his money around like Malfoy seems to do, and it sounds like a more logical reaction, considering his upbringing. But I guess it's a matter of perspective. Sometimes it's probably that the author wishes to have that sort of money to be able to buy whatever they want, so they give Harry money and then send him on a shopping spree, buying lots of clothes the author would want. Always thought it would be more sensible to put these short stories into some multi-chaptered "story" as sort of an anthology. Keeps them together and doesn't clog up the wegsite. And just for the record, a drabble is per definition something that has 100 words; 500 and more words are short oneshots. That's one of these things that irritate me - all these wrongly labelled stories. |
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Aug 29, 2015 20:52:42 GMT -5
Technically I know that it is pretty normal that people who have suddenly money go on to spend lots of it just to show they can, and to feel good about it. But it's still not my style; I'd rather react like you think Harry would, and I suspect you are right about him. In the books, he never came over as someone who throws his money around like Malfoy seems to do, and it sounds like a more logical reaction, considering his upbringing. But I guess it's a matter of perspective. Sometimes it's probably that the author wishes to have that sort of money to be able to buy whatever they want, so they give Harry money and then send him on a shopping spree, buying lots of clothes the author would want. Always thought it would be more sensible to put these short stories into some multi-chaptered "story" as sort of an anthology. Keeps them together and doesn't clog up the wegsite. And just for the record, a drabble is per definition something that has 100 words; 500 and more words are short oneshots. That's one of these things that irritate me - all these wrongly labelled stories. Mind you in about half the stories, Harry isn't the one shopping it's *insert female character* who is just dying to buy Harry all sorts of clothes regardless of budget or what he wants (oh and don't forget the father figure making jokes about 'lol, women like shopping, better just sit back and say yes') or whether he wants to be paraded around like a dress up doll and pay for the privilege.
I've seen differing story lengths be called drabbles. It's a point of some contestation in some circles. Personally, I don't read them, I am not a purist, I just want to be able to filter them out and for people not to post 300 at once.
On to three different pet peeves.
1. American magic schools being perfect. I've seen maybe one story which includes there being something wrong with American magical schools but other than that, whenever they come into the picture they seem to have nothing wrong with them. And of course, I'm sitting here going 'ok yeah, Europe isn't exactly a haven where racism is non-existent but the USA cannot point fingers on the racism thing'. I mean, were magical schools ever segregated. With the country being so big are there magical schools in majority Black areas which are chronically underfunded. What happened to magical slaves brought over under slavery, were they supposed to unlearn their styles of magic? What about under the Jim Crow laws, was there a magical arm of the KKK? What about Native American magic, was that prohibited? Were there magical assimilation boarding schools which forced them to stop using their native style of magic?
2. That sort of ties in to this. The Magical Wise Native-American healer/teacher/etc. Now I am all for more representation, especially within HP but this isn't so much representation as a trope and kind of a microaggression. They're almost always there to help dispel the Horcrux 'naturally' or to heal or to teach someone to be an animagus.
3. Authors describing prescribed gender roles in societies and leaving it at that. It's so god damn boring and unrealistic. For one thing, these people seem to be doing little to no actual worldbuilding to back up these gender roles, we're just told that they exist and that everyone follows them. We have no idea how or why they came into being, just that they are there. What are the consequences for breaking them, can you break them if you're high enough or low enough social class (which is usually the way, either you're too powerful enough for people to do anything about it or you're not powerful enough for anyone to care). Gender roles are rarely so strict as these people think and tbh, you think of a country and a historical period and I will bet money that I can find women transgressing what you'd consider the stereotypical gender roles of the period providing there's a reasonable amount of written evidence. And we're not just talking a few remarkable women like Joan of Arc, we're talking the fact that a widowed woman could run a business, own property and generally be powerful af.
And that's probably full of run on sentences and not exactly coherent but I'm having trouble articulating why it bugs me when authors stick women (and it's always women) into these prescribed but mostly undefined gender roles for the sake of a small amount of exposition or a plot point without any kind of critique. Yes the pureblood world is kind of stuck in the 19th century but women were still pretty awesome then, despite what primary school Victorian history might have told you.
And it gets in my craw when they do it to goblins. They're not human, why the fuck would they have prescriptive human gender roles. So they use the human pronoun 'he', we have no idea about goblin gender norms or pronouns. Christ, they could have figured out centuries ago that wizards seem to refer to them all as he/him and don't much like being corrected or lose the modicum of respect they had when they find out they've got a female teller. I just...there is so much more you could do with them and it would all be infinitely cooler and more interesting than 'oh female goblins are kept hidden away and protected because they're ladies'.
That's not even getting into the concept of people or goblins outside the gender binary, but that might be a little complicated for most fanfic writers.
Here endeth the rant.
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on Aug 30, 2015 18:10:00 GMT -5
The first point about the American schools being portrayed as practically perfect in every way, I totally agree with, and would like to expand on that a little and say that it's not just the schools that are portrayed as perfect. It seems that many authors are extremely parochial in their stories, making the entire bloody country is perfect in every way. However, there is definitely one story that does mention problems in American society, and I'm sure there are others.
As for the stereotyping of the Magical Wise Native-American healer/teacher/etc. I'm not so sure that is quite as much of a trope as one would think. I'm no expert, but the native American tribes were fairly conscious of and had a lot of respect for, nature and animal life. The idea of a Native American having the ability to do something that a British Wizard isn't capable of, isn't that implausible, what with how isolationist Wizarding Britain seems to be. There are plenty of plants that are only native to the Americas, and I'm sure that the native Americans wouldn't want knowledge of their capabilities being spread around too much, so we really don't know what they could do.
And with the third point, I agree. Of course, some of the stories that seem to make use of the idea of gender roles, only do it to make it seem even vaguely plausible that Hermione or another girl would put up with being ordered around like a slave, without actually being a slave. Goblins on the other hand, I've no idea what the deal is with females. There is the possibility that there is very little chance of telling the two genders apart. For all we know, the goblins do have certain positions within the bank that only the females do, and maybe Griphook is actually female.
That's actually an interesting idea. Goblins working in the same position as Griphook all being female, while the tellers or other positions are held by males.
Or:
What about the idea that the word Goblin is their word for male, and another word refers to the females of their species, who deal with other things within their society, such as the paperwork, investigating crimes against the bank, or even public relations. Heck, the 'spokesgoblin' mentioned in the Daily Prophet article about the break-in on 31st July 1991, could be female.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Sept 2, 2015 12:36:09 GMT -5
Yeah, that is annoying. It's something I dislike, and even so when the girl in question doesn't even listen to what Harry wants. Giving some opinions what looks good is one thing, but dictating every single piece of clothing is another matter altogether. What makes me even more uncomfortable with it is the fact that Harry never had any choice that way - first he was forced to wear Dudley's rags, and then his girlfriend dictates everything. They just decide he can't have any taste and that is it. Personally, I think they should give him the chance to develop his own style.
Over time, I have seen a few authors who were really good at drabbles, though not in the HP fandom - they could say amazingly much with these 100 words. But too many can't differentiate what really should go into it and what not, and I don't think I know any HP drabbles that work for me. And I agree that these should be put into one story as unconnected drabbles in order to not spam the whole site full with them.
American schools - here I agree, too. Have seen that often enough, though a lot of stories I know sent them to Australia instead. Not that it was much different there, mind you. While it is easy to make it better than Hogwarts in some things, like proper teachers that don't bully students and get away with it, it is not very believable that everything about them is perfect. Maybe I should check for the nationality of the authors when I see these; somehow I suspect they are Americans in most cases and just want something better for hteir own country as JKR dared to set her story in the UK.
With the native American magic, I don't know too much about it, but the bit I have read about them in the real world certainly points to many of them being more in tune with nature, more ... spiritual, I thihk, would be a fitting word, and less technology-obsessed than we are. So I could see the US native magicals having some methods the British magicals do not have. Besides, the way Britain is ruled by pureblood bigots, can't you just see them refuse anything that is not developed or invented by a pureblood?
As for gender roles ... while it doesn't fit well with our times, did you consider that the magical world is way behind the times, and in the Victorian age or earlier these stereotypes were more correct? Sure there were always some who defied them, but not in the same amount than nowadays. So, while you can of course overdo it badly, I think there can very well be at least some truth to these stereotypes.
|
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Sept 2, 2015 14:08:12 GMT -5
Two things. You both just illustrated the point I was making. The stereotype of Native Americans being spiritual, wise or more in tune with nature. It might be a nice stereotype but it is still a stereotype. Yes there are people of Native American descent who are very spiritual, undoubtedly, but there are also people of Native American descent who are not and have little interest in spiritual matters.
Secondly, the problem is not that the Native American teacher is able to teach. The problem is that that is the only representation we see of Native Americans. I would absolutely adore a story focusing on how Native American magic survived, and in what incarnation. Are there magical schools on Reservations, do tribes whose have more history of their magic share it with ones that don't?
Yes I did. The idea of strict gender roles over the entirety of society is very much a primary school notion of history. Poor women worked, rich women socialised and married, the middle to upper middle class certainly did have some rigid gender roles. But the Victorian era also included women going to university, the founding of the NUWSS (Suffragists), early ideas of feminism, the start of the ability to divorce.
Now by no means am I saying it was a good time for women, but what I am saying is that gender roles are rarely so simple as all that. And that rarely do authors who try and write that sort of thing into the HP universe take into account historical precedent as has to do with both social movements and individual women doing things.
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on Sept 4, 2015 13:31:26 GMT -5
One thing many authors do, when they try to write gender roles into their stories, is forget that JK had quite a few females in high positions. Amelia Bones, Minerva McGonagall, the other female teachers at Hogwarts, other females in the Ministry, etc, and even in the History of the Magical World, there were others, like Artemisia Lufkin, Dilys Derwent, Evangeline Orpington, and many others.
That's what irritates me about the whole gender roles thing. If the Magical World really was strict with gender roles, then none of the teachers at Hogwarts or any of the Magical schools would be women, and there certainly wouldn't have been any women becoming Minister for Magic or Healers at St Mungos.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Sept 4, 2015 15:12:10 GMT -5
It's just one of these things in canon that many authors chose to completely disregard, leaving you wondering if they did read the same books you did. The role of women, Remus being the only Marauder with a brain, Goblins being all nice and helpful just because you were courteous to them, that sort of thing. I've nearly given up on getting all worked up, even though there are exceptions to the rule |
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Sept 8, 2015 4:51:25 GMT -5
It's not really a 'fanfiction pet peeve' so much as a specifically tumblr related one.
Sometimes I enjoy following HP blogs, and I get that they need to appeal to everyone
but posts like this make me hiss like a wet cat and have this reaction
I just, it irritates me that Lily gets reduced to 'person who made Snape feel things' when she made it clear at fifteen that she no longer wanted to be. Also the 'Snape holding Lily's body and crying' scene makes me angry. |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Sept 8, 2015 5:12:11 GMT -5
*whimper* I hate flashing pics!
For some reason I suspect that most of these people are Rickman fans who are completely unable to separate the actor from his role. Rickman is hot/cute/whatever, so Snape has to be, too. It is probably no comfort for you, but I completely agree with you. It makes me nauseous.
|
|
|
|
Post by RandomPasserby on Nov 1, 2015 5:06:33 GMT -5
New Pet Peeve. The various fics where Harry has an upbringing which treats him more like a warrior and he arrives at Hogwarts as an 11 year old who's been doing the sort of exercises they give to adult military cadets.
Am I the only one who sits there going 'um, that's a small child you've got there, over exercising at that age can seriously damage the child'. There's a reason there are minimum ages on things like gymnastics (and if you'd done research you'd know the number of gymnasts who end up needing surgery either after or during their career due to injury is high).
|
|
