Books you regret reading

[Minty]

When you go further back into history, there is certainly more female representation at the top levels of wizarding society than there was in contemporary Muggle society. After all, two of the Hogwarts founders are women: you wouldn't get that in an 11th-century Muggle school.

Well, the more you look into history, the more you begin to see through Rowling's rather superficial worldbuilding. I'm not sure there's anything terribly clever about projecting 1990s cultural values back onto historical periods and pretending that makes you progressive.

[Vinyadan]

When you go further back into history, there is certainly more female representation at the top levels of wizarding society than there was in contemporary Muggle society. After all, two of the Hogwarts founders are women: you wouldn't get that in an 11th-century Muggle school.

I guess it depends if it was a nun or a monk school.

[Themrys]

Well, the more you look into history, the more you begin to see through Rowling's rather superficial worldbuilding. I'm not sure there's anything terribly clever about projecting 1990s cultural values back onto historical periods and pretending that makes you progressive.

This.

In Rowling's case, I assume it is unconsciously done. But I've met at least one misogynist male who thought himself very generous and progressive for approving of the status quo in Western Europe, and disapproving of the much more severe oppression of women by men in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, etc. (Though this dude actually didn't like modern life, he was looking for a woman who'd become a housewife for him).
That dude had a habit of making the Middle Ages appear much worse than they actually were so his own misogyny would look like progressiveness by comparison.
His "Okay, in retrospect, perhaps was a need for feminism in the past, but we don't need it anymore, things are great now, you modern feminists are going too far" attitude is certainly not rare.

"What we have is perfect, and any perfect society would function like this" may look like progressiveness if compared to ^worse^ conditions, but the aforementioned dude made the mistake of projecting his cultural values onto a fantasy world that was explicitly free of sexism, making his own misogyny very obvious.

With Rowling, it is not quite so obvious, as she doesn't explicitly claim that magic society is more progressive. But it is implied.

I am sure Rowling wants to be a feminist. And I do appreciate that. But reading her adult books in some way made me unable to pretend that she intended the magic society to be quirky and oldfashioned and put the sexism in ^intentionally^. It seems to be an unconscious bias.

[Keltest]

This.

In Rowling's case, I assume it is unconsciously done. But I've met at least one misogynist male who thought himself very generous and progressive for approving of the status quo in Western Europe, and disapproving of the much more severe oppression of women by men in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, etc. (Though this dude actually didn't like modern life, he was looking for a woman who'd become a housewife for him).
That dude had a habit of making the Middle Ages appear much worse than they actually were so his own misogyny would look like progressiveness by comparison.
His "Okay, in retrospect, perhaps was a need for feminism in the past, but we don't need it anymore, things are great now, you modern feminists are going too far" attitude is certainly not rare.

"What we have is perfect, and any perfect society would function like this" may look like progressiveness if compared to ^worse^ conditions, but the aforementioned dude made the mistake of projecting his cultural values onto a fantasy world that was explicitly free of sexism, making his own misogyny very obvious.

With Rowling, it is not quite so obvious, as she doesn't explicitly claim that magic society is more progressive. But it is implied.

I am sure Rowling wants to be a feminist. And I do appreciate that. But reading her adult books in some way made me unable to pretend that she intended the magic society to be quirky and oldfashioned and put the sexism in ^intentionally^. It seems to be an unconscious bias.

Um... magical society is in fact highly dysfunctional. They have approximately one national news source that is in any way considered to be reliable, and even that is recognized to be a mouthpiece for the government. The government itself is shown to be minimally effectual at best. Major crises are handled by private civilian militias, who's membership frequently included individuals also in the government's official task force for dealing with those crises. Society at large isn't taught any basic math or logical skills. They keep literal death traps in and around a school, which itself sits on the edge of one of the more dangerous areas of magical Britain. Theyre so isolated from the rest of the world that even the government groups dedicated to understanding it are less knowledgeable about it than an average 11 year old.

[Rater202]

Um... magical society is in fact highly dysfunctional. They have approximately one national news source that is in any way considered to be reliable, and even that is recognized to be a mouthpiece for the government. The government itself is shown to be minimally effectual at best. Major crises are handled by private civilian militias, who's membership frequently included individuals also in the government's official task force for dealing with those crises. Society at large isn't taught any basic math or logical skills. They keep literal death traps in and around a school, which itself sits on the edge of one of the more dangerous areas of magical Britain. Theyre so isolated from the rest of the world that even the government groups dedicated to understanding it are less knowledgeable about it than an average 11 year old.

They employ slavery.(We still don't know what the deal with house elves is--dothey need to serve to live? Were they bred to be subserviant? What's the deal?)

They don't know what guns are--the Daily Prophet spells it as "gonne" and describes it as a "type of metal wand muggles use to blow each other up," while Kingsley askes Arthur about "firelegs" two books later. Firearms were invented in the 12th century, which I think is before th Wizards went into hiding.

[factotum]

They don't know how to use phones either (the muggle-born Hermione has to tell Ron how to use one), yet they have magic buses that drive around London and can make a car fly...I don't think internal logic is a strong point of the wizarding world as presented by Rowling, to be honest.

[Keltest]

They don't know how to use phones either (the muggle-born Hermione has to tell Ron how to use one), yet they have magic buses that drive around London and can make a car fly...I don't think internal logic is a strong point of the wizarding world as presented by Rowling, to be honest.

Well sure, they understand MAGIC just fine. The fact that their magic transports are vehicle shaped is largely incidental to how they work, I think.

[Sapphire Guard]

They don't know what guns are--the Daily Prophet spells it as "gonne" and describes it as a "type of metal wand muggles use to blow each other up," while Kingsley askes Arthur about "firelegs" two books later.

Not everyone knows about them, which is not the same as nobody knowing about them. And Kingsley is acting ignorant in that scene, he later perfectly passes muster in the office of the prime minister.

Well, the more you look into history, the more you begin to see through Rowling's rather superficial worldbuilding. I'm not sure there's anything terribly clever about projecting 1990s cultural values back onto historical periods and pretending that makes you progressive.]

Which is sidestepping the original point, about how there are a very wide variety of female perspectives shown in the book holding a wide variety of positions across society with nobody really finding that worth comment or being resistant to any of it. This is well ahead of most of its peers.

Zeroing in on the one stereotypical housewife (the existence of which in itself is not a bad thing) isn't enough to call the work misogynist unless you flat ignore a hell of a lot of other characters.

[factotum]

Well sure, they understand MAGIC just fine. The fact that their magic transports are vehicle shaped is largely incidental to how they work, I think.

Well, the flying car is controlled in the same way as a regular car, though (steering wheel and all), and Ron's father actually drove it (without flying, obviously) to the train station, so it still seems odd the family knows about that (and presumably enough about driving to get to their destination without being pulled over for traffic violations), yet can't operate a phone.

[Keltest]

Well, the flying car is controlled in the same way as a regular car, though (steering wheel and all), and Ron's father actually drove it (without flying, obviously) to the train station, so it still seems odd the family knows about that (and presumably enough about driving to get to their destination without being pulled over for traffic violations), yet can't operate a phone.

Why would they ever actually need to use a phone though? besides such devices flat out not working in magic heavy areas, phones don't really provide a service that wizards need or can use the way cars do.

[Rater202]

Why would they ever actually need to use a phone though? besides such devices flat out not working in magic heavy areas, phones don't really provide a service that wizards need or can use the way cars do.

Actually, I'd like to point out that it's specifically the magic around Hogwarts that's cited as interfering with electronics.

If it was magic heavy stuff in general, then between the Ministry and the Alleys large swaths of London would be permanently without power.

[Keltest]

Actually, I'd like to point out that it's specifically the magic around Hogwarts that's cited as interfering with electronics.

If it was magic heavy stuff in general, then between the Ministry and the Alleys large swaths of London would be permanently without power.

isn't the Ministry deep underground?

[Talar]

Why would they ever actually need to use a phone though? besides such devices flat out not working in magic heavy areas, phones don't really provide a service that wizards need or can use the way cars do.

Well they do not need a car really either due to the Floo Network and apparating. I think the bigger issue in Rowling's writing and world building is how shallow and surface level it is and I think that this is what makes it seem to be misogynistic to some at times as well as seeming so due to a couple tropes that she uses in the books. There are many female characters in the story, but their motivations do not vary much. Molly and Narcissa are both motivated by the same issue of their children. Bellatrix falls into the trope of only being motivating by man(Voldemort), Ginny just ends up sorta being there for Harry to have a love interest seemingly (just not much to the character in the story presented as is, though she does succeed in a sport which is presumably dominated by men but that is an offhand comment at the end of the last book). Luna is an oddball and generally breaks the stereotypes. Hermione has that Gilderoy ordeal as a strike against her, but overall is a good female character I think. IMO she is the only competent protag out of the core three.

I think most of the tech stuff shown is there for comedic effect, which is pretty lazy honestly, and makes little sense to me. Besides technology being generally amazing, I would want to keep up with and understand the population that presumably fears me and mine and led a crusade against me. Also can we mention how easily it would have been for one SAS operative to take out Voldemort? I feel like there would be a couple SAS guys who could make a mile long shot at least. Especially when Voldemort is causing havoc in the last book. The trick would be finding Voldy.

[georgie_leech]

I thinkwe must have been reading different books if you came away with the impression that, just as one example among many, Ginny was just there to be Harry's love interest. Or does going from shy around people (especially so with Harry, but not uniquely) to more confident, being a capable student and athlete, having a knack for snark, and running around organizing resistance groups and fighting dark wizards all not count just because she also likes the protagonist?

[NontheistCleric]

I thinkwe must have been reading different books if you came away with the impression that, just as one example among many, Ginny was just there to be Harry's love interest. Or does going from shy around people (especially so with Harry, but not uniquely) to more confident, being a capable student and athlete, having a knack for snark, and running around organizing resistance groups and fighting dark wizards all not count just because she also likes the protagonist?

Most of those things are actually in the background most of the time. Ginny only really starts to come into focus once Harry begins to have feelings for her, and although it's fair that since the series is told from his point of view, she is for the most part presented only in relation to those feelings, but the fact is that Ginny spends a large amount of her page space as a focus for Harry's romantic feelings/sexual desire/worry.

It's perhaps not as bad as Talar makes it out to be but there are clear indications that her main purpose was to serve as love interest.

[factotum]

Also can we mention how easily it would have been for one SAS operative to take out Voldemort? I feel like there would be a couple SAS guys who could make a mile long shot at least. Especially when Voldemort is causing havoc in the last book. The trick would be finding Voldy.

Ah, but the SAS doesn't know about the wizarding world, so why would they randomly decide to shoot some bloke waving a wand? Actually, that's my biggest problem with the whole concept of the books--the idea that somehow this parallel world of wizards and witches is entirely secret from the world at large, despite there being numerous Muggles who know of its existence (Harry's adoptive family and Hermione's parents, just as two examples).

[Keltest]

Ah, but the SAS doesn't know about the wizarding world, so why would they randomly decide to shoot some bloke waving a wand? Actually, that's my biggest problem with the whole concept of the books--the idea that somehow this parallel world of wizards and witches is entirely secret from the world at large, despite there being numerous Muggles who know of its existence (Harry's adoptive family and Hermione's parents, just as two examples).

It isn't. Not really. They have the obliviators to handle random muggles they don't want to know, but the magical and non-magical governments interact from time to time, usually during changes of leadership. People know, but since magic world keeps to itself, they're content to leave it that way for the most part.

[Friv]

It isn't. Not really. They have the obliviators to handle random muggles they don't want to know, but the magical and non-magical governments interact from time to time, usually during changes of leadership. People know, but since magic world keeps to itself, they're content to leave it that way for the most part.

And in fact, we know that the British Prime Minister was specifically informed about Voldemort being alive, so people are in the know.

Probably not most members of the SAS, but it wouldn't surprise me if the British government has a few strike teams who are theoretically able to handle things. The problem is, wizards have an incredible ability to appear and vanish; the SAS has to be exactly where Voldemort is wand-waving within a couple of minutes. Given how often otherwise normal people have been able to lead a city worth of law enforcement on a chase for hours in the past, the idea that the Death Eaters can get around easily by turning into clouds of fog and flying off before snipers can reach them doesn't strain my credulity. Doubly so since, if the Death Eaters spot snipers setting up, they can easily pop in behind them and Imperius Curse them into shooting each other and providing Voldemort with covering fire. Guns only win if you get the drop on your enemy.

[Keltest]

And in fact, we know that the British Prime Minister was specifically informed about Voldemort being alive, so people are in the know.

Probably not most members of the SAS, but it wouldn't surprise me if the British government has a few strike teams who are theoretically able to handle things. The problem is, wizards have an incredible ability to appear and vanish; the SAS has to be exactly where Voldemort is wand-waving within a couple of minutes. Given how often otherwise normal people have been able to lead a city worth of law enforcement on a chase for hours in the past, the idea that the Death Eaters can get around easily by turning into clouds of fog and flying off before snipers can reach them doesn't strain my credulity. Doubly so since, if the Death Eaters spot snipers setting up, they can easily pop in behind them and Imperius Curse them into shooting each other and providing Voldemort with covering fire. Guns only win if you get the drop on your enemy.

Given the nature of the Death Eaters, I rather doubt they would even recognize muggles as a threat, and indeed if Voldemort wasn't actively keeping his actions confined to the magical world, would probably have been hunted down and killed well before Harry could do anything about him.

[Sapphire Guard]

Given the nature of the Death Eaters, I rather doubt they would even recognize muggles as a threat, and indeed if Voldemort wasn't actively keeping his actions confined to the magical world, would probably have been hunted down and killed well before Harry could do anything about him.

How would they find him?

There are many female characters in the story, but their motivations do not vary much. Molly and Narcissa are both motivated by the same issue of their children. Bellatrix falls into the trope of only being motivating by man(Voldemort), Ginny just ends up sorta being there for Harry to have a love interest seemingly (just not much to the character in the story presented as is, though she does succeed in a sport which is presumably dominated by men but that is an offhand comment at the end of the last book). Luna is an oddball and generally breaks the stereotypes. Hermione has that Gilderoy ordeal as a strike against her, but overall is a good female character I think. IMO she is the only competent protag out of the core three.

Umbridge? Trelawney? McGonagal? Why the assumption that Quidditch is male dominated? There's nothing particular in the book that supports that, the hogwarts teams have a fair few women.

Wow, if having one unfortunate crush at twelve years old is such a huge black mark, I really don't know what you're expecting. Ginny had the whole of book 5 where she was not on Harry's radar as a love interest, but was still doing other things.

[One Step Two]

I have a few books leap to mind for me, having a flash memory means I remember books pretty easily on titles alone, so once I read them they are seared there.

The first of which is Wuthering Heights which I had to read in high school. It was the height of tedium. My English teacher tried to convey the complexity of the characters against the backdrop of the times in the book, etc, but it was such pointless bullcrap. So-called " tale of forbidden love" told in the most ponderous way possible, that ended in utter mediocrity. Bronte and my English teacher can jump off a Heathcliffe for all I care.

The second major one is regret mixed with adoration. The Dark Tower, specifically the last god-damned chapter which had the warning signs. I can respect it, and it makes perfect sense, I actually love King for such an interesting twist on the story-telling medium, Ka is a Circle after all, but god-damn did it make me ever regret doing it.

And more a footnote than anything, I read the Twlight Saga. Because when I learned that there was a book series which my sister went out and bought all the books to read, I was curious. I borrowed her copies and speed-read my way through all the books of it in a couple of days. I don't need to explain to most people in this thread why it was something to regret, but I found it more tiresome and bland than outright terrible, but I could understand it's broad appeal.

[Talar]

Going to try and respond to most points, forgive me if I miss a few. So Trelawny has one moment and it's to spur the plot along a bit and be a bit of a red herring seeing as the prophecy didn't matter as much as it was made out to be. It was only a thing because Voldemort sort of bought into it. I honestly forgot about Mcgonagal, that one is on me. While she is an important character; she just didn't spark much in my memory. Umbridge is just a bureaucrat, and has one definable characteristic of being a sadist. Ginny rounding up remnants of Dumbledore's Army, people who already want to fight and do not need to be convinced to do so, isn't all that impressive or noteworthy. It is more of a nod to the main three for setting DA up. Most of Rowling's character are one dimensional, what I would have hoped for is some more dynamic characters overall. She also missed a lot of thematic opportunities in the later books, opting to instead focus on camping in the woods. Primary among these opportunities being the Slytherin students participating in the defense of Hogwarts and rejecting their parents ideology, since she made it out to be that the vast majority of the death eaters were from the Slytherin house.

My reasoning for quidditch being male dominated is that she bothers to note an all female professional team multiple times (the something Harpies) and says how unique it is to the sport. Also at Hogwarts only about 5 girls are mentioned playing the sport (the 3 chasers on Gryfindor, Cho, and eventually Ginny) for a total of 28 players at the school, only having 5 girls would again lead the sport to being male dominated.

Again most of my problems seem to stem from Rowlings writing being shallow overall for the most part. Her characters are not complicated overall. Do not get me wrong, it is a wonderful story. But the writing overall is lacking in many regards and the books should not be held up as a paragon of such. Hell most of the ideas in the books aren't even her own and were actually plagiarized. Jane Yolen wrote a book numerous years before the Sorcerer's Stone that included many of the things in Harry Potter including the sorting hat.

I just feel like there would be more of a muggle response to the whole situation is all.

EDIT To contribute to the point of the thread, I regret reading Fahrenheit 451. It just was not what I was expecting. And for some reason that I cannot quite pinpoint the writing style irked me. It was built up to me before I got around to reading it, so I think that mostly contributed to the feeling of disappointment over it.

[factotum]

Again most of my problems seem to stem from Rowlings writing being shallow overall for the most part. Her characters are not complicated overall.

But that applies equally to both the male and female characters, so it's hard to see why you're apparently viewing this as some sort of misogynistic agenda on Rowling's part?

[hamishspence]

Hell most of the ideas in the books aren't even her own and were actually plagiarized. Jane Yolen wrote a book numerous years before the Sorcerer's Stone that included many of the things in Harry Potter including the sorting hat.

Jane Yolen did point out that the commonalities are likely to be coincidental:

https://www.wired.com/2013/01/geeks-guide-jane-yolen/

“I’m pretty sure she never read my book. We were both using fantasy tropes — the wizard school, the pictures on the wall that move. I happen to have a hero whose name was Henry, not Harry. He also had a red-headed best friend and a girl who was also his best friend — though my girl was black, not white. And there was a wicked wizard who was trying to destroy the school, who was once a teacher at the school. But those are all fantasy tropes … There’s even a book that came out way before hers where children go off to a witch school or a wizard school by going on a mysterious train that no one else can see except the kids, at a major British train station — I don’t know if it was Victoria Station or King’s Cross. These things are out there … This is not new.”

[Vinyadan]

But Hermione is never said to be white!

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/statu...d%2Findex.html

[hamishspence]

Presumably Yolen was making the assumption, based on cover images or the movies.

[Peelee]

But Hermione is never said to be white!

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/statu...d%2Findex.html

Which would hold more weight if Rowling didn't have any say in the book covers. I don't give a whit one way or the other on anything she tries to retcon in, but I do think that with how much she does, she's become the new George Lucas.

[Keltest]

Which would hold more weight if Rowling didn't have any say in the book covers. I don't give a whit one way or the other on anything she tries to retcon in, but I do think that with how much she does, she's become the new George Lucas.

Also, theres a line in one of the books about her pale skin at one point.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Which would hold more weight if Rowling didn't have any say in the book covers. I don't give a whit one way or the other on anything she tries to retcon in, but I do think that with how much she does, she's become the new George Lucas.

To be fair, she did NOT say Hermione was black either. She said she did not have a problem with Hermione being portrayed by a black performer in the play - that nothing in the text requires Hermione to be white (nor black). Her two most prominent physical characteristics - bushy hair and large front teeth - fit both. A few occasions (such as getting tanned in France) means that she can't be Subsaharian black, but you wouldn't expect that from a British kid anyway. Heck, by the same reasoning, she also can't be a pasty "British" white, who burn rather than tan.

Now, I have not kept up with the continued revelations of her website, so I'm not sure how many other supposed ret-cons she has made. But I think you are being just a tad unfair with comparing her to Lucas' revisioning of his films.

---

As to accusations of underdeveloped female characters, I'd like a side-by-side comparison of how said characters stack against the development of male characters. I suspect it comes out to about the same - Harry Potter may have a large cast, but it is ultimately a story about Harry, not anyone else. There are hints that stuff is going on around him, but it goes unexplained, because it would unfocus the book (case in point, the "subplot" about Molly/Tonks/Remus, that demonstrates the adults do have their own dramas, but barely impacts the book)

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

To be fair, she did NOT say Hermione was black either. She said she did not have a problem with Hermione being portrayed by a black performer in the play - that nothing in the text requires Hermione to be white (nor black). Her two most prominent physical characteristics - bushy hair and large front teeth - fit both. A few occasions (such as getting tanned in France) means that she can't be Subsaharian black, but you wouldn't expect that from a British kid anyway. Heck, by the same reasoning, she also can't be a pasty "British" white, who burn rather than tan.

Now, I have not kept up with the continued revelations of her website, so I'm not sure how many other supposed ret-cons she has made. But I think you are being just a tad unfair with comparing her to Lucas' revisioning of his films.

Grey Wolf

I also have not kept up firsthand with continued revelations, and am only restricted to knowledge from my much more HP-inclined friends, so there's absolutely a chance I'm overplaying things here. I think it's great that she stood up for the unconventional casting in the play, because it doesn't matter who plays her. I just think it was slightly disingenuous of her to do it by saying, "nothing says that she is white," when she personally helped pick a white girl for the cover art and a white girl for the movie. If I were in her shoes, I would have simply said, "It doesn't matter. Deal with it." I will admit to having somewhat unconventional views on the issue, though, so I understand if others disagree.

Also, you're right about the Lucas comparison. That was a bit much.