Happy Potter and the (7th book title)
There are students of different ethnic backgrounds at Hogwarts, but those I can think of are residents of great Britain. But are there French students, Bulagarian students, Russian students, Paskistani students- are there students who are attending Hogwarts and are not British subjects? The students of diverse ethnic backgrounds that I know of at Hogwarts are British. The accents are all British.

I am not going to make an assumption that American students were deliberately excluded until it is clear that there are students from other non-Great Britain- countries there. Someone with a French accent, an Indian accent, a Polish accent. If there are a number of students from non-British countries there, then I would wonder why no American students. I noticed in the last movie that the representatives of the two other schools were all of that ethnicity- there were no British or German in those teams, only French or Bulgarian. So this is why I suggested that perhaps the people of each country attend their own wizardry school.
Darq Ali Wrote:To clarify:

I am a citizen of the U.S. and Hitler would have called me a "mongrel American"; my heritage is rather mixed.

But most of my ancestors who migrated to the Americas came from various points on the British Isles, specifically, England itself, Ireland, and Cornwall. Most of my ancestry is Celt. As the most recent of my immegrant forbears was my paternal grandfather, I am aware of, and some of my family is in regular touch with, "cousins" several times removed who still reside in Cornwall. I know a great deal of family history back to the 1600's, including that of those who left England to come to America long before it was the U.S.

My heritage is from the same roots as JKR's. I have an interest in and read a lot about that part of the world.

First of all, all Americans are 'mongrel' Americans, even the Native Americans.

Second of all, I'm American also. My mother is Mexican, and my father is mostly of German/French descent. I don't see what that has to do with the discussion at hand.

Quote:I know my country isn't very popular overseas due to modern events and politics, but then, some elements of the British government do some unpopular things, too, and I don't hold the populace of that nation responsible.

American government isn't very popular with many Americans either. But as political discussions are still not allowed on these message boards, let's move on from this topic.

Quote:Again, I have read some "anti-american" statements from JKR; and what she has written ......... and left out of .......... the HP books bears this out. Many countries other than England are often mentioned; and people of many races are included. I know full well today's Great Britian hosts a very mixed populace, and the students of Hogwarts school reflects this, with Black and India/Indian, Scots and Irish students and so forth playing at least secondary roles and having many, many references. Harry's first love interest is ......"Cho Chang", not exactly of English extraction; and so on. Other nations and continants recieve lesser but common notice, too.

Not so the Americas. I have listed the handful of references and noted they are so scant as to be almost non-existant; and at very best, neutral, otherwise negative. I am well aware that England ruled India, Hong Kong, and Egypt; has swallowed formerally independant kingdoms of Ireland and Scotland {and Wales and Cornwall and so on}. But the Americas were major colonies, too; and no one seems to have an American or Canadian cousin, and that is rather odd, seeing how we manage to have characters from France, and even Bulgaria, of all places!

When you consider that much of Europe is often referenced, as well as Egypt/Africa and even Asia, the utter absence of all the Americas is rather glaring.

I'll need references to JKR's anti-American stance, because right now it's merely heresay. There are plenty of other countries that JKR doesn't mention at all. Does that mean she's against them also? I don't always have nice things to say about other countries or their governments, but it doesn't mean I'm necessarily opposed to them or the citizens of those countries. It just means I don't agree with them.

Quote:As for the actors playing "natural" roles, then I suppose I should consider it "unnatural" whenever anyone other than a native born American plays any role in American cinima? Yet I never have once considered that. Either a person is suited to the role and plays it well, or they do not; and if they do a good, convincing job ............. that's why they call it "acting", because none of these people actually exist.

Ah, well. I am re-thinking my loyalty to the lands of my ancestors. I gather it was very misplaced.

Fleur is fun as being very French but I see no reason she could not have been from New Orleans; for there resides a tradition of witchcraft and dangerous women not found in France, still speaking French and of French extraction. Or Hati, for that matter; a much richer past. And I doubt JKR is unaware of that. Any more than she is unaware of America's rich tradition in the legends of Giants.

And again, none of us are saying that actors are not capable of playing characters from other countries or time periods. We are merely acknowledging that JKR has the right to choose British actors for her movies if that is what she wishes to do.
Sheldon: I'm not crazy. My mother had me tested.

~ The Big Bang Theory
Yes, that is what Harry is told by both Ron and Hermionie; Harry has never thought about it, until the issue arises in "Goblet of Fire", first because of the International Wizarding Community's gathering for the Quidditch World Cup, and then, because of the International nature of the Tri-Wizard Tournament.

That is, that Hogwarts isn't the only wizarding school.

Yes, the students such as the Patil twins {India}, Cho Chang {Hong Kong, perhaps?}, the Black Angelina {some African former colony, such as South Africa}, and the Irish and Scots origin students are "natural" to attend Hogwarts, and I do not doubt it nor suggest it is wrong.

"Trelawney" the teacher is from Cornwall, a former independant kingdom, as I long ago noted on another thread ........ perfectly natural .......... and she would be a "cousin" of mine.

Considering how many English, Irish and Scots immegrants there are/were to the U.S. and Canada, it just seems odd that we can have many references and characters from everywhere else, but never the United States or Canada, or say, Bermuda.

As I said, the Americas have some very interesting "magical" traditions. We have the "very French" Fleur. Well, the French Quarter of old New Orleans has a deep, rich and on-going "magical" tradition going back centuries ..... which France lacks. I can just see a "very French" Fleur from New Orleans making up gris-gris bags .......... }. I mentioned the issue of the Giants; American folk lore is rife with interesting giants {sure, I know all about the English "Jack the Giant Killer" tales, too}.

JKR references ancient Greek, Roman and Egyptian traditions and many European magical myths. Asia does not fail to get representation {Chinese Fireball, Cho Chang}.

The absence of anything and anyone from the Americas makes an interesting contrast, considering the very numerous non-English references in the past six books. Again, I doubt JKR never heard of Marie Lavoue {a very celebrated witch} and every other American magical reference and tradition {Sleepy Hollow?}; her passing reference to Salem was poorly done {Salem was a colonial community, fully British in nature, which hanged numerous accused witches, all of which were, of course, innocents. A "Salem Witches Institute" might have made sense ........... had the "Salem Witches" of history been burned}.

Again, as an American with a life long fondness for my considerable British roots, I pretty much feel like JKR spits in American faces .......... but she's happy to take the money for her books, of course, all the while holding us in contempt. It would be different, if she had not gone to such pains to include characters like the Black Angelina and Cho Chang, and the "Greek Chappie" in the pub who offered Hagrid a dragon's egg. JKR is very, very happy to be open to all races and cultures ............ with one exception.
GamgeeFest Wrote:First of all, all Americans are 'mongrel' Americans, even the Native Americans.

I am not certain I wholly agree with this.

Of course, there is but one current Human species, of which we are all members; and to some degree, we are all inter-related, and in another sense, we are also all of "mixed" background, if one wants to be very, very "technical" {which I was not intending}.

In the area where I currently reside, there are many "Native American" [First Nations] people. Reservation people are required to document their descent {to qualify for programs} and some are very proud of their "pure" tribal background. The actual origins of all "Native" peoples are of course subject to considerable debate, as is the relationships of various tribes. But Native peoples living today as a rule know if they are "pure" Native or not, and from which tribe or tribes they descend.

Also, the area in which I reside was rather late to be settled by Europeans. While "non-native" people residing here may be of any background, it is actually very common for people to be wholly aware of their actual background and much of it is not mixed, or, is of a clear and known European mixture. My husband had four immegrant grandparents; he is exactly half Norwegian and half German extraction. People whose descent is "Pure" Norwegian, German and Russian are common here, and if they are mixed, it is within the past two generations, and they know the mix.

Second of all, I'm American also. My mother is Mexican, and my father is mostly of German/French descent. I don't see what that has to do with the discussion at hand.

My point, and the relevance, is that I may be a U.S. citizen, "an American", but that I identify closely with the world of Great Britian, because it is the world of my ancestors, whose history I know very well, and the world of many of my living relatives. I don't see myself as "foreign" to JKR's world. I get the feeling, however, that I am seen as "foregin" and "unacceptable" to her.

American government isn't very popular with many Americans either. But as political discussions are still not allowed on these message boards, let's move on from this topic.

I was not attempting to discuss politics. I was simply pointing out that the populace of a country is very often not responsible for the behavior of its leaders. A great deal of the populace of the United States and Canada is of British extraction. We are people who are very akin to the people of the British Isles, we share a common language and culture. To be shunned or ignored seems very odd, when one can include the Bulgarians, French and Egyptians and many others in ones writings ............ That was my point.

I'll need references to JKR's anti-American stance, because right now it's merely heresay.

I cannot say how frustrated I get with the tone of message boards, when no one can post anything from memory. I one time looked up several HP message boards and did a lot of reading, to get a sense of what was out there, so to speak. More than one contained direct quotes and so forth on this topic .......... that JKR didn't like Americans, wouldn't "allow" American actors to appear in films based upon her HP books, and so forth.

I found this "interesting" and have reviewed in my mind the references she has made in her books. And I find that the entire North and South American continants are almost never mentioned; that the very very few references there are are either negative or neutral at best. That indeed, Americans play no roles in the films.

But I also noted, I did not write down the web address to provide a reference. No, I am not going to look it up, but I doubt the idea is wrong. The observations I have made are very true: JKR does a HUGE amount of research into the magical and legendary traditions of many, many cultures outside of her own British roots, and these are reflected in the HP books ........ but she's pretty much utterly ignored the Americas. Since the Americas do have such traditions too, the idea the the omission is deleberate seems well supported.

There are plenty of other countries that JKR doesn't mention at all. Does that mean she's against them also?

I have never contended that JKR references every other nation save the Untied States. I have, however, noted that both the U.S. and Canada represent a huge land mass, a huge population, and are both former British colonies. Yet they find no part in HP's tales, though a huge segment of their modern populace descend at whole or in part from British roots; while other former British colonies find direct and on-going representation. Like, Angelina and Cho Chang and others. And, that she finds room for references to many which are not British {Bulgagians, ancient Romans, ancient Greeks, Egypt and so forth}.

All of this supports the notion that JKR really does have an anti-American bias. Sure, I don't recall any direct reference to someone from, say, Angola or Cameroon or Finland and so forth; no one can deny that not every nation on the planet finds reference in Potterverse. Yet many nations not related at all to Great Britian do, and many times over. It is the U.S. that JKR was reported to have negative feelings about, not Sweden. So the omission of a nation which has its origins in British colonial rule seems rather obvious, when so many OTHER former British colonies, and nations not realted to them at all, are so often referenced.

And again, none of us are saying that actors are not capable of playing characters from other countries or time periods. We are merely acknowledging that JKR has the right to choose British actors for her movies if that is what she wishes to do.

Many times when I have expressed an opinion, I have made a point to make it plain that the story is JKR's, not mine. Of course the decisions and controls are hers, and not mine!

But again I will say:

I READ that JKR is pretty "down on" America and all things American. A review of the entire body of HP works seems to bear this out; including the stated insistance that only "British" actors play her characters in the screen versions.

It seems rather odd that the Americas should seem so totally absent from her works, and American actors totally absent from the films based upon them, if JKR really wasn't prejudiced. The result supports the suggestion that she is.

Which, of course, she is entitled to be.

But again, it seems she isn't against American money, being willing to have her works published and sold here. A bit inconsistant, that's all. Biting the hand which makes one wealthier than the queen, and all. "I'll take your money and spit on you all the same."
Quote:By Lanky_*******, at Mon Jul 18, 08:50:42 PM

Only a few countries are represented in the Potter books. I don't recall any German, Italian, Dutch, Scandinavian, African, Asian or Australian witches or wizards. (Karkaroff and his Durmstrang students aren't identified by nationality, other than Krum. Cho Chang and the Patil twins are British.) South America? A mention that one of the Weasley boys once had a pen pal from Brazil who sent him a cursed hat.

The Salem Witch Institute, flying the Stars and Stripes, at the QWC campground, gives the US more presence than other countries that are not involved in the plot.

From a marketing point of view, JKR is missing a bet here. Based on all this, I think she's just very British, and deals with all that foreign lot only as the plot demands it.


There is considerable discussion of this matter at the above linked site.
Thank your for this reference. Any who suggest that I am utterly alone in the perception of an "Anti American bias" from JKR can see that I am not the only one who thinks so, and that references to the subject do exist.

I disagree that few nations are represented in the HP books. Many, many nations are represented; not always mentioned by name, but by both that and other means, names of her characters and other references, such as using the magical/mythical traditions of numerous cultures. When one uses ancient Greek or Roman figures from myth, one does not have to say, "Greece" or "Rome", for example.

I disagree that the inclusion of such characters as the Patil twins, the Black Angelina, and Cho Chang do not reference "other countries". I have already stated that I fully understand that the population of the modern British Isles is very mixed, and that many who are now there have ancestry from numerous former colonies. But including them references those now independant countries, after all; their names and descriptions make it clear that these are not native Britons, Celts, Anglo-Saxons or Normans in background. Yet there are no such references to anyone from the US, Canada or other former British colony in the Americas.

I did not suggest I would not read JKR's books because I percieved a bias against my own nation, either. I was simply observing the appearant bias.

What distresses me about this issue is related to my purpose in reading the books. In the past, I have been a teacher. After ceasing formal teaching, I have nonetheless maintained a relationship with children, mentoring in a community program and participating in library reading programs. Selection of quality children's literature is therefore of great interest.

To be certain, the purpose any author may have in writing their works is their own; many have multiple purposes; and those are subject to debate. In any event, the author's purposes are thier own, no matter what we may think of them. And I recall the preplexed reaction of Robert Heinlein to various critics' analysis of one of his early children's books, attempting to assign some deep meaning to a plot twist: He pointed out that it simply never seemed to occur to them, that he was a writer who was attempting to make a living, and that his plot needed no "deeper meaning" than that it would appeal to his audience, so that the publisher would pay for the book since they thought children would like it, and he could then pay his bills!

Perhaps JKR wanted only to pay her bills, and told us her tale to earn money and Harry's story has no deeper meaning at all, other than JKR writes something she thinks children will like, so that her Publisher will pay her for her efforts. If so, no one can debate that she is wildly successful.

But it has been my idea that she wanted more than that alone; that she was producing a Teaching Tale. Certainly, many of the consistant elements of the HP books seem pointed in that direction.

Dumbledore, and people his actions have touched [especially Hagrid and Lupin], have addressed the issue of prejudice many times. How, "what you were born" or "what you are" does not matter; that it is what you do, the choices you make, that count.

You can be a Werewolf {no fault of your own}, a half Giant {no fault of your own}; Muggle-born {no fault of your own}; a Half-blood {no fault of your own}; or a Pureblood, born into a very long line of Dark Wizards {no fault of your own} and still be "acceptable", considered "good people", because of the choices you make for yourself. Thus, Lupin {werewolf}; Hagrid {half giant}; Lily Evans [and in the next generation, Hermionie] {Muggle borns}, Harry himself [and Snape] {half-Bloods} and Sirius {Purebred from a long line of Dark Wizards} are all major characters who are "acceptable" to Dumbledore, despite backgrounds "some" are prejudiced against.

To me, this is to demonstrate to readers [The targeted readers: children] that prejudice is inherently wrong. And thus it is also very important, and proper, that the likely readers find many real diverse groups common to the world of Hogwarts also be included, and accepted. We see Irish, Scots, India/Indian, Black and Chinese ethnic students all among featured characters, and each is "acceptable"; none are targets because of their ethnicity, they date freely among one another, and so on.

Thus, children of very diverse ethnic backgrounds can read the HP books and get the dual messages:

"No matter what I was born, I am "acceptable" {provided I make good choices; but even if I mess up, if I admit it and seek forgiveness, I am worthy of another chance ................}"


"It is wrong of me to be prejudiced against anyone I meet based on what they were born. It is what they do, the choices they make, that matters .......... not the group they belong to for reasons of birth or accident, not something they chose".

And this is why I see it as "wrong" to exhibit a prejudice against Americans. I read that JKR has directly expressed such a prejudice and my review of the books and films suggests this is so.

And of course, others can "read" the same evidence and come to a different conclusion, as well.

I don't say I won't read the last book. I do say, the author seems not to live up to her own standards.
Quote:And I’m sorry, Arcadia; thank you for pulling up that reference, but personally I still find the whole thing very sketchy, at best

Smile No need to be sorry, I am unwilling to accept that JKR has excluded the Americas because she is anti-American. I found both arguments on the above source, but I did not search any further having found the source, since my interest in reading speculation from other sites became thin at that point.

In other words, my vote is for her not being anti-American in the movies or books. Maybe we will never know for sure- or at least not enough to convince me, since I don't want it to be so.

I'll hang around even so, in case we get a definite quote from JKR about the matter. I don't know what else would convince me. And, as I mentioned someplace here, discussion of theories and conclusions is a way of passing the time until we get another book. Smile
Thank you for the link Arcadia. But as the link within your link to the initial Brainbridge article was broken, all I could read was similiar speculation as we have going here. Based on what I read there, I can understand JKR's hesitance at having an American screenwriter and Haley Joel Osment as HP. Frankly, in her place, I would feel the same way. Some authors don't care what studios and screenwriters do to their works, but JKR has always been very protective of the world she has created. If she wants the integrity of the books and the British-ness of the books to be maintained in the films, then I completely understand that.

As for America not being more represented in the books - these books are based in England, not America. We are not the only country that is not represented in the books. And if you look back in history and realize how often the Americans become involved in world events very late in the game, then it makes further sense that Americans haven't been involved in the books. After all, we have yet to be threatened.

Let's reverse this and say that the HP books were written by an American and take place in America, with many references to Canada, Mexico, the Carribeans, Puerto Rico, Columbia, Peru and Samoa, for example, but few to little references to Britain, and in one of those references a British wizard sent an American wizard a cursed hat. Does that mean the author is be anti-British? Hardly. Would Britains be correct to demand more representation? No. Should the author cave in to such demands and jeopardize their vision for their own creation that they have been fostering for the last ten years to appease a few readers? Heck no. If a British director wanted to make the movies and introduce British customs to replace American ones and the author said (understandably) "I don't think so", would that then make the author anti-British? No.

I've seen nothing but speculation so far and it's not enough to convince me. From what I've seen, this is a case of some people being too darned sensitive and making a mountain out of a molehill. And with that, I too am done discussing this. Let's get back to the book title, shall we?
Sheldon: I'm not crazy. My mother had me tested.

~ The Big Bang Theory
First, I fail to see that stating, "I read that JKR is somewhat Anti-American, and here is my analysis of what the books contain {and fail to contain}, and the issue of actors, does to support this idea" requires any references.

If you don't agree with the idea, fine. I think posters {such as myself} do not need to provide "links" to other people's statements on the same topic in order to bring it up. It seems to be a "given" that no one can bring up an idea unless they can "prove" some one else has already done so. And that is simply silly, IMO.

Second, I did not say that the United States or any magical traditons here ought to be included in JKR's works. I simply noted that references to the U.S. in particular, indeed, the Americas in general, are very, very scant; and they are. That the very few references to anything from either of the American continants is neutral at best, to negative, and the one reference to "the United States" is very poor.

[I refer to Harry's notice of "The Salem Witches Institute" under a Red White and Blue banner in the campground at the Quidditch Cup in G of Fire. I am the first to mention this. The incident at Salem was in Colonial times, in a British colony, and the "American" adoption of Red, White and Blue for their national colors was far in the future. And JKR has the past abuse of witches de-bunked by having Harry explain that the real wizarding folk accused, tried and "burned" by Muggles never suffered at all, because the fire didn't harm them; and in fact, that many enjoyed the experience. But the unfortunates accused of Witchcraft at Salem were not burned - they were hanged. {Uh, all but one, who was pressed. None were burned.} And that didn't happen in The United States, because the United States didn't exist at the time. So, using this reference, a very negative one, was ham-handed at best. And supports the idea of an anti-American bias on the part of the author, considering the care with which she does her research.]

The second major thing that supports an anti-American bias is the insistance no Americans be allowed to try out for the roles of the characters. Again, I utterly agree that is JKR's perogative. But it would make as much sense to demand that anyone playing magical characters be real witches or wizards. These are fantasy roles, and depicting the character well is good acting.

Again, I am simply comparing the "messages" repeated over and again in the text, to the behavior of JKR herself.

Saying no American actor can properly depict any of her characters is a prejudice which she herself speakes against. It would be like saying Hagrid should not apply to Hogwarts because he was born from a Giantess mother or that Lupin should not study magic because a werewolf bit him when he was a child. Disqualifying people because of what they are, and not giving them any chance to show what they can do.

her business

O.K., the title.

Why does this thread start Happy Potter?
Darq Ali Wrote:O.K., the title.

Why does this thread start Happy Potter?

Ha ha! Never noticed that....:bg: I like it! :daisy:
I noticed the title from the beginning and assumed it was a typo by the original poster.

When I read a statement on a thread, I like to have a link or reference. If it is something that can't be remembered, this is fine, too. I have had that happen to me more than once. There is another thread somewhere on the forum that announces that JKR says that one of the Weasley's will die. Yet there is no link or reference so that others can go and read the actual statement. So others must believe that the poster did indeed read this and interpreted it correctly, instead of verifying it by reading it themselves. That the poster can't find it or doesn't remember where it was read is OK, it just doesn't provide the proof that a link or reference would.
I understand, if it were a quote. And I am sorry I do not have any links, but my computer skills are very poor and I did not keep any references to the sites I did the reading on, exploring. Mostly they were frequented by children. One adult site was very interesting to read, but if you weren't established there your comments weren't welcome; and I wanted to converse, not just read.

I was not trying to "prove" anything. I was attempting to "discuss".

I am curious:

The assertion was that JKR wanted British actors to portray her characters in the films. The reason given was that this was a tale set in Great Britian, and that such actors would be most suitable to portray the characters.

Please note, again I say that I am in full agreement that it is proper for an artist to control their own work. A writer is an artist, and if they sell their story for film adaptation and wish to retain such control, I find nothing wrong with this.

However, I am wondering: Since the reason given was that it is most natural and best that British actors always portray the British characters, in the last film {Goblet of Fire}, was the decree also made that only French actresses play the French characters, and that a Bulgarian actor play Krum, and were the other non-British characters likewise cast only from the nationalities represented in the tale?

Just interested to know.

As for the book title "Happy" rather than "Harry" in this thread, I assumed it was an typo, but found it odd that it was not corrected. Unless theat titles cannot be altered?
Titles can be altered. So I assumed the poster was Happy with it. Smile

Well, the movie was filmed in Great Britain, so it would be reasonable to use British actors. The Bulgarian and French characters were played by British actors were they? I didn't know this. I guess it may have been more than they wanted to do to recruit actors of other nationalities. Except for Hagrid, of course. They needed a real giant ... wait a moment. I think it must be far far past my bedtime.

I am in complete sympathy with not recording the location of everything that one reads. I don't do it myself at all. For one thing, frequently I have no idea that I'll ever need to provide a source.
A favorite saying of mine is,

"What you do speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you say."

Perhaps JKR is simply a person doing her work; as a Writer, it is her "job" to create a story which can be sold. And if that is the end of the story, if there are no 'messages' in the HP books, that is the end of that.

But I seek quality children's tales that have positive messages. Our young are not born educated and civilized. While each human is ultimately responsible for their own life decisions, it is beyond dispute that having access to positive role models and 'good messages' is an enormous help in shaping young lives in positive directions.

Sadly, many media seem geared toward very negative role models. "Bad Boys" and slutty girls are glorified; very bad actions gain a great deal of {seemingly} postitive attention, and wholesome images are often the subject of mockery and derision. At the outset, I found the HP series a breath of fresh air. In the early books, the role models were generally positive, the "good" characters appealing, and the work well-written enough to tempt many children to actually read the works for themselves. And while it is sad that some are more drawn to the abusive Snape and the Bad Boy Draco instead of the more positive characters, still, if they follow Harry's story, they are reading the positive images as well.

One cannot simply tell children about values; example is a far better educational tool than lectures. [Which is why the History classes at Hogwarts are so horribly dull. I'd have Dumbledore's Pensive on perminant loan if I were the Ghost Professor, Binns is it? Having a look at a real witch burning or a Goblin War would be far more interesting than listening to a ghost drone on about it ........]

Developments in recent books begin to disturb me. Yes, I understand and accept that "good actions" are not synonomyous with "instant good results". Dumbledore rightly points out that "right actions" may be hard, while wrong ones can be far easier. The world is not a perfect place; people really do some awful bad things, and must be oppossed lest we be over-run and ruled by the thugs of the world; and fighting them off may entail sacrifice.

And people are a 'mixed bag'; Mundungus may be a petty criminal, but that doesn't make him a wholly bad person, and his kind may serve "the good side"; "the world is not divided between good people and Death Eaters". Shades of Grey are real; judgement calls are not always easy.

But why are the most "successful" Weasley children the school dropouts who defy authority at every turn? Why are their "pranks", cast as "funny", so abusive and often truely dangerous to their fellows? How can we have an Arthur Weasley who is dead set against abuse of Muggles by Wizarding Folk, have two sons who abuse the Muggle Dudley and find it fun? [I gave Harry full marks for not leaving Dudley to those Dementors; and no one could have really blamed him had he done so .........] And now the protagonist himself saying, "I'm going to drop out of school ............."

These are similar issues to my concern about the possibility of an "anti -" anyone bias demonstrated by JKR in real life. When you are such a public figure whose press is followed by so many impressionable children, the example you set does matter. [From those to whom much has been given, much is expected.]

If JKR says, "My stories are set in Great Britian, so I will assume the characters will best be portrayed in cinima by British actors", this is a very logical and non-offensive stand for her to take. It can simply arise from a concern that the effects of the film are "true to" the images she intended to portray in her books. A utterly non-offensive line of reasoning, if that is all there is to it .........

Totally negated if she does not also insist that the French Fleur {and her French classmates and teacher} not be played only by French actresses, and that the Bulgarian Krum be played by an authentic Bulgarian actor, and so on.

In other words, the notion that roles should be played only by natives because that is "best" is an obvious and outright lie, isn't it?

Now, I pay little attention to actor persons and couldn't name any of the people who played in any HP film. For myself, I don't care.

But I found the message of ......... " it is your behavior that counts, not accidents of birth that should matter in your life " ...... a very good one, and find it sad that the person who works that message over and over into her tale so skillfully, finds it something they cannot practice in real life. We all have our prejudices, but "right living" demands we recognize our own weaknesses and struggle to overcome them. And yes, I do think that children notice when adults do not practice what they preach.


Well, we are all "happy" that we have a title, and a publication date, after all.

Harry has not seemed happy for a very long time; only his finding real and comfortable romance with Ginny seemed a truly happy theme in the past couple books. The tone is now so dark, and this title with Deathly included does not encourage me.

I know that Dumbledore explained that the Prophecy clearly meant that either LV or the Prophecy Boy would have to kill the other. That doesn't seem to preclude both dying, either. *sigh*

I am all for messages about standing up to and confronting bad people, not letting them have all their way when we see wrong things being done. But I was never in favor of Harry being a bigger badder more wicked killer wizard than LV, nor of his dying as a sacrifice to save the Wizarding World {nor his best friends, either, even while understanding that the Old Wizard With the White Beard always dies in these tales ..........]

I hope the plot twists manage to surprise me in a postive way, because I have not liked the way this tale has been taking us of late.
Darq Ali Wrote:And while it is sad that some are more drawn to the abusive Snape . . . [snip]

I don't know that I can agree to Snape being "abusive".

Quote:Developments in recent books begin to disturb me.

Just recent books? What about Christopher Marlowe's The Jew of Malta or The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus? Shakespeare's Falstaff, Romeo or Macbeth? Gilgamesh was the original "bad boy", and also the original fantasy epic. Paris, Achilles, Agamemnon, all questionable to say the least in Homer's Illiad not to mention Odysseus from Odyssey and Oedipus from Oedipus Rex or the Monkey King from Journey to the West. Candide from Voltaire? Raskolnikov from Crime and Punishment? Conan? Hannibal Lecter? Alex from Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange or Michael Corleone from The Godfather? Raymond Chandler's Philip Marlowe or Dashiell Hammett's Sam Spade? Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer each had their own titles. James Joyce used Stephan Dedalus in Stephan Hero and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. Joseph Conrad's Kurtz from The Heart of Darkness?

The trend of "bad boys" legitimized and glorified is hardly a new one, and appears to be as old as the telling of stories.

Quote:Totally negated if she does not also insist that the French Fleur {and her French classmates and teacher} not be played only by French actresses, and that the Bulgarian Krum be played by an authentic Bulgarian actor, and so on.

I know you stated that you don't know the actors, so I went ahead and researched them for you:

Fleur Delacour is played by Clemence Poesy. She is a French native.

Cho Chang is played by Katie Leung. She is a Scottish native.

Viktor Krum is played by Stanislav Ianevski. He is a Bulgarian native.

Padma and Parvati Patil are played by Afshan Azad and Shefali Chowdhury, respectively. Both are UK natives.

Angelina Johnson is played by Tiana Benjamin. She is a UK native.

Lee Jordan is played by Luke Youngblood. He is a UK native.

It appears that every attempt has been made to fill a particularly defined role with a native from that country.
All your base are belong to us.

It could be that the purpose of my life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Good! Then, JKR has practiced what she preached, and the excuse that UK actors are used to play UK school children is carried over to include a French actress in the role of a French student and so on. Exactly right! That is why I asked, was this done?


I was refering to the most recent books of the HP series, not recent literature. The last book that seemed at least hopeful was Goblet of Fire, for though LV had managed to come back, he had not managed to kill Harry, and Dumbledore was on to him from the get go, and Snape managed to get back into place to play spy, and so on.


Snape as abusive:

I see him as abusive. His first day with Harry was abusive beyond belief. He knew full well that Harry had no Wizarding background whatsoever at home, had in fact learned his own heritage only recently; knew that Harry had never known his parents, could not know of James' emntiy toward Snape. Yet he held Harry up to ridicule in front of the entire class for no reason whatsoever. Snape asked questions that most students could not answer, but didn't allow Hermionie to answer when she could correctly, and humiliated her too.

His treatment of Neville qualifies as abuse to me. You do not teach timid and uncertain students by calling attention to their problems in front of sniggering rivals; and while Nevelle has his faults, he is a child while Snape is the adult.

A clear example of "abuse" is his treatment of Hermionie after she had been hit with the spell that enlarged her teeth.

Teachers can be strict and set very high standards, keep order without being abusive. McGonnagal does at Hogwarts. Harry wouldn't cross her, had to work hard for her, didn't want to displease her, wouldn't mess around in her class. But she was not abusive.

Now, I will say from the get-go that people differ in their "take" of Snape; but he is to me "abusive". Using his power to favor his own House is an example, too, of his abuse of Power.

Snape has the emotional maturity of an eight year old. He is stuck hating Harry because he never got over hating James, and cannot seem to seperate the two in his mind. Lupin said Sirius had trouble telling Harry apart from James. Seems to be a common problem; but Sirius had plenty of excuse for his problems, like years under the dementor's tender care. We don't know all Snape's history, and he may have had his reasons for inner torment, I know. Still. As a teacher, he was "abusive". IMO, and I agree, that is to a degree in the eye of the beholder. I had two "Snape" type teachers in my school years, and neither was a very good teacher, though both would qualify as highly intelligent and well educated. Their problem was that they were control freaks whose aim was to "prove themselves" superior to their students, not impart knowledge nor challenge their students to their best work. Abusive, yes.

An awful lot of teachers don't seem to understand what their job is.
I split this as the question of Snape's abuse is a wholly different subject from the current conversation.

If you're interested, you can follow under the Is Snape Abusive thread.
All your base are belong to us.

It could be that the purpose of my life is only to serve as a warning to others.
It is true topics wander off in absurd directions, good idea to split that part off. Back to the titles.

We have "HP and .............."

"............Sorcorer's/Philosopher's Stone" ... {a thing/object}

"............Chamber of Secrets" ................ {a place}

"............Prisoner of Azkaban" ................. {a person}

"............Goblet of Fire".......................... {a thing/object; or, a competition?}

"............Order of the Pheonix"................. {an organization, or, group of people}

"............Half-Blood Prince"...................... {a person, again}

and now, finally,

"............Deathly Hallows"........................{a place, again?}

Does the nature of the second part of the title, person, place or thing, aid us in our forcasts? If we can decide that the "Hallows" of this title are actually things {Horcurxes, perhaps}, does that tell us more than if the Hallow are a place {like, 'Hallowed grounds' like a graveyard, church or sacred grove .........}, does this aid us in our guesses about the upcoming tale?
Darq Ali Wrote:"............Goblet of Fire".......................... {a thing/object; or, a competition?}

I would say a thing for this one. The Triwizard Tournament was the competition.

Darq Ali Wrote:and now, finally,

"............Deathly Hallows"........................{a place, again?}

Does the nature of the second part of the title, person, place or thing, aid us in our forcasts?

I think that is a safe assumption. IMO, the titles of the previous books were descriptive of or tied in some way to what would occur in their respective books.

Darq Ali Wrote:If we can decide that the "Hallows" of this title are actually things {Horcurxes, perhaps}, does that tell us more than if the Hallow are a place {like, 'Hallowed grounds' like a graveyard, church or sacred grove .........}, does this aid us in our guesses about the upcoming tale?

At this point, I think it does. We know that Harry is going to endeavor to find and destroy the remaining Horcruxes in Book 7, so, as was said before, "Deathly Hallows" being another name for the Horcruxes would certainly fit the story. That's not to say it is definitely in reference to the Horcruxes, but I for one am inclined to believe that it is.

MYCode Guide

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Harry Potter vs Encanto badlands 3 236 March 2nd, 2022, 01:06 AM
Last Post: Michael
  Harry Potter exhibit badlands 0 161 February 20th, 2022, 09:43 PM
Last Post: badlands
  Slavery in Harry Potter badlands 1 242 February 7th, 2022, 09:33 PM
Last Post: Michael
  Is Harry Potter really Moaning Myrtle? badlands 3 228 February 6th, 2022, 04:12 AM
Last Post: Michael
  Harry Potter game badlands 2 888 March 14th, 2021, 11:18 PM
Last Post: Boomstick
  Harry Potter bar badlands 3 562 February 5th, 2021, 03:59 PM
Last Post: Michael
  HBO Harry Potter reboot badlands 1 446 January 31st, 2021, 12:24 PM
Last Post: Michael
  Harry Potter theories badlands 10 1,226 November 5th, 2018, 12:17 PM
Last Post: august
  Did Harry Potter die? badlands 3 649 November 5th, 2018, 12:12 PM
Last Post: august
  The Hillywood Show Harry Potter parody (video) Michael 4 922 September 17th, 2018, 05:33 PM
Last Post: Michael

Forum Jump: