You will never be a wizard at hogwarts

>you will never be a wizard at hogwarts

Other urls found in this thread:

theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/03/the-other-harry-potter-that-never-was/387364/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>We just never saw them
JK Shitlord is oppressing me

Don't worry, you're a wizard in real life, much better!

>We Just Never Saw Them
Is this because they were in concentration camps?

No!

I am convinced that she didn't write a single word of Harry Potter and someone who didn't want the limelight wrote it and let her take credit.

Why would there be gays in the Harry Potter universe? Couldn't they use magic to make them normal?

just like Shakespeare.

It's probably because there was no point in the story where it was relevant which if any of the students were gay or jewish

You will never be a ...

fucking white males

Magic can't change who you are inside shitlord

>can openly berate mugglebornes
>safe place

O-okay

Nah

>"Ten Reasons Why Hillary Is Our Hermione"

dullest franchise etc

I love how now everyone is getting on the 'oppression bandwagon', pretty much retconing everything to show how inclusive it is after the fact.

Oh what's the flavor of the month? Trans people, sure we'll say background character #20985902 is trans, that'll get those simpleton to buy more copies. See people we are inclusive!

Either fucking play your entire hand out when you release your work or shut your damn trap afterwards. Leave that pandering bullshit to the fan fictions.

Well unfortunately those gay and Jewish kids lived in a horribly written book series. And in one of the dullest franchises in history. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Why? Are you implying that writing Harry Potter was some kind of advanced intellectual achievement?

>only 13 million Jews in a world of 7 billion people
>everyone still sucks their dicks

Remember guise, Sup Forums is a meme :^)

wtf i love harry potter now

>jewish

why and how?

rewatching the series and it's funny how many minorities they shove in there

anyway

3 > 6 ≥ FBAWTFT > 7 > 5 > 7 part 2 > 2 > 1 > 4

So where were all the teenage pregnancies? I don't see sex education on the wizard curriculum.

>modern journalism

I can't believe people get paid for writing shit like this

>you will never be able to use polyjuice potion to transform into a girl

Hermione wasn't black.
>w-well she wasn't white either!

There weren't any gay or jewish students.
>y-yes there were they just hid in the shadows!

Harry didn't have sex with Ron.
>y-yes he did they were all bisexual i swear i just couldn't find a reason to bring it up

There were no transgender biracial amputee students at hogwarts
>o-of course there were they just couldn't move around so they weren't part of the main story

Compared to the regressive idiots that are killing north America they really are. But I won't have to live through your failure. Luckily.

Can you imagine the amazing world of magical sex toys and contraception?

>"Ten Reasons Why Hermione will grow up to be Hillary"

this is the result of "we'll it's a fictional world why can't there be any black transqueer cyborg criplles alongside the magic. it makes sense!!!!"

Whether or not Hermione was black isn't really the same question as whether or not a black person can play her in an adaptation of it.

She stole the idea.

theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/03/the-other-harry-potter-that-never-was/387364/

I truly didn't give a shit who played her because i'm not a Harry Potter guy but for Rowling to come out and say the character wasn't written as white was truly stupid and clearly pandering so nobody get's their feewings hurt.

"Young People, Who are More Likely to be Left Wing, Are More Likely to Dislike Donald Trump. Harry Potter to Blame?"

Boggles the mind, really. Top-tier journalism.

Why? Because you don't share her political views?

Journalism is dead, long live the tabloid.

She didn't say the character "wasn't written as white" so much as that there was nothing about the character that meant she couldn't be black.

Don't need them in the world of polyjuice potion and animaguses

I wish Voldemort was a better villain. They portrayed him as the magical Hitler but he was more like some faggot terrorist.

what a lame attempt at virtue signaling. up your social justice warring game, bitch!

Well it should be expected that safe space babies would be fans of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

i fail to see the difference

>this meme works without the pic
"No!"

All that article said they have in common is the synopsis. Everything else is entirely different.

It means Rowling doesn't put very much thought into her characters

schizo

>ywn shitpost old articles like OP

Donald Trump won the white millennial vote though, 48-43

Her exact words were

"Canon: brown eyes, frizzy hair and very clever. White skin was never specified. Rowling loves black Hermione"

However white was clearly specified in the books and she looked stupid, she could have said i don't mind a black version of hermione and that would have been it.

One suggests that she had no race in mind when she wrote the character. The other is simply pointing out that her race is incidental to her character and there's nothing about her that precludes her being black in an adaptation.

>Magic can't change who you are inside shitlord

But it can make them change their mind about being gay. That's the point.

this is ridiculous and pathetic
it's fucking ridiculous if she was asked why there were no gays or jews

one point is that an English school probably would have a few jews in it, but it's not like it matters, can't we just assume this based on context
and there's another thing, literature can be fucking anything, it doesn't have to be stated, all the potters and weasley's could've been jews or blacks, Rowling could claim that Harry was jewish or black tomorrow and it's not like we could say shit
the whole thing is fucking pointless

and I didn't even mind when she said Gandalf was gay, it kind of suited how she never game him any love interests and made sense in her twisted little world, but what's the fuckin point with the jews and further gays and that

The only time white was specified in the books was that time when it said Hermione's face went pale when she was surprised or whatever the fuck the line was. It was obviously being used as a simplistic way to express her shock, it wasn't a literal description of her skin tone. Even if it was, the larger point that Rowling is making is that she didn't bother to make a point of Hermione's race because it doesn't matter, so there is no reason why she has to be white in an adaptation.

Sorry user I tried to add some spice to it and instead created one of the dullest memes in history. Seriously...

You sound like you have brain damage

I voted for Trump and dislike him as well. Slavoj Zizek convinced me he was a better choice then Hillary.

Yeah, same idea. Wizard kid with round glasses and a pet owl growing up with powers. She would have been sued to hell by now if she completely ripped him off.

>we didn't see the jews

well maybe not in hogwarts

Reminder: being pro-Rowling = being anti-Left.

Why were the house elves so OP? Dobby could solo Voldemort easy.

>We just never saw them

Haha yeah ok, Rowling

No Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, etc though.

Also, wouldn't it be blasphemy to assign religions to some wizards? God making man in his image, etc?

there are a few pooinloos though

I see no possible way that any common religion could coexist with the wizarding world.

Let me guess there were Muslims and trans too, but we never saw them for "some reason"

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Rowling should come out and say Jesus was a wizard, hence all the miracles and shit.

See how fast her books get burned in America.

>tfw passed all the wizard entry exams with flying colors, top 2 percentile
>don't get my Hogwarts scholarship funded due to diversity quotas and affirmative action
>I'm a more promising candidate than the majority of students and am already operating on a 3rd year level

It was a pretty thoughtless response on her part since monotheistic religious don't exactly work with wizardry. She's also implying we can spot a gay by looking at them.

I'm a white fucking male who voted for trump and hp is the best series hands down

Gonna be honest guys, Dumbledore was a fucking islamophobic bigot.

>adapting the whole first paragraph
the absolute madman

FB is shit m8 becauze rowling wrote the film script. Second half is lame as is the climax.

Its Yates worst.

Other than that you did pretty good

>3>7.1>6>5>7.2>1>2> 4

>we JUST never saw them
>muh gorillion from the greta wizard purge
The fucking pandering is horrendous

It makes sense when you think about it.
>wizard world is some utopian society that is run by a global ministry
>bad guy is literally Hitler and has no good in him so reader can't give sympathy
>promotes blood mixing

Because her political views are such bland, regurgitated progressive shit that it's impossible to imagine anyone with such views having the ability to write seven coherent books.